worthwhile. >> ♪♪ ♪♪ . >> good afternoon everyone. this meeting will come to order. welcome to the december 8th 2025 regular meeting of the use and transportation committee of the san francisco board of supervisors. i'm supervisor myrna melgar, chair of this committee joined by vice chair supervisor cheyenne chen and supervisor bilal mahmood. the committee clerk today is john carroll and i would also like to acknowledge jim kawana

from s.f. captive for helping us broadcast this meeting. mr. clerk, do you have this any announcements? >> yes, thank you, madam chair. please ensure that you silenced your cell phone and other electronic devices you've brought with you into the chamber today. if you have any documents to be included as part of any of today's files you can submit them directly to me. public comment will be taken on each item on today's agenda when your item of interest comes up and public comment is called please line up to speak along your right hand side of this room. alternatively you may submit public comment in writing in either of the following ways. first you may email your comments to me at j o h and period c a r r o l l at sfd of your g or you may send your written comments by us postal service to our office in city hall. the address is one dr. carlton bigelow place room 244 san francisco, california 94102 if you submit public comment in writing i will forge your comment to the members of this committee and also include your comments as part of the official file on which you are speaking. >> items acted upon today are

expected to appear on the board of supervisors gender of december 16th 2025 unless otherwise stated. thank you very much mr. clerk please call item number one agenda item number one is a resolution adding the commemorative street name bryan craig kelly way to hollister avenue between jennings street and engel street in recognition of brian craig kelly and to enshrine his legacy in the bayview hunters point community . thank you we are joined by supervisor sharman walton from district ten at the sponsor of this legislation. >> welcome supervisor. thank you so much chair melgar and just want to say to the public that this is a long time coming. we have been working with the family on this commemorative street name designation for quite some time to honor the name of brian craig kelly who was gunned down years ago and hollister is the street that he grew up on. he is a member he was a member of the baby hundred point community, an upstanding member

of the community. he has comes from an amazing family and he has family here with us this afternoon and so just excited to to bring this forward so that we can honor his memory and do right by his memory. >> thank you. thank you so much for your efforts. supervisor walton, let's go to public comment on this item. >> thank you, madam chair. land use and transportation will now hear public comment related to agenda item number one brian craig kelly way if you have public comment for this item please come forward to the lectern at this time i'm pointing it out with my left hand. i think that we have some speakers who are ready to speak on this item. madam chair, it appears we have no speakers. okay. thank you so much. i would like to be added as a co-sponsor of this legislation please supervisor and thank you

on behalf of all mothers and children in san francisco for acknowledging this without mr. clerk let said that i will make a motion that we send this out to the full board with a positive recommendation and i failed to close public comment. >> i'm going to do that now. public comment is closed. i madam chair, i forgot to mention that this item was so no, that's correct. madam chair, i'm recording a motion from you that this item be recommended to the board of supervisors on that motion. >> vice chair chen chen i remember mahmood mahmood i chair melgar i melgar i madam chair there are three eyes. >> thank you. that motion passes. thank you. supervisor walton with that mr. clerk let's go to items two through four together please. >> agenda item number two is a resolution declaring the intention of the board of supervisors to vacate portions of high street, griffith street and bancroft avenue for the development of the fire

department training facility at 1236 carroll avenue and setting a hearing date for all persons interested in the proposed vacation of street areas. within that that item is on our agenda as a potential committee report and may be sent for consideration by the board tomorrow, december 9th, 2025. agenda item number three is an ordinance amending the zoning map of the planning code to change the zoning use district designation of various parcels along the full width of bancroft avenue between griffith street and howe street and the full width of griffith griffith street and high street between carroll avenue and armstrong avenue collectively known as the 1236 carroll avenue project from production distribution and repair district to two public changing the height and bulk district designation of the aforementioned parcels and the assess and assessor's parcel block number of 4852 lot number one from 40 x to 90 x the ordinance affirms the planning department secret determination and makes other findings. agenda item number four is an

ordinance ordering the vacation of portions of hall street griffith street and bancroft avenue for the development of the san francisco fire department training facility at 1236 carroll avenue reserving public utility and access rights in favor of the city and easement rights for existing parking and overhead electrical facilities. it approves the interdepartmental transfer of the street vacation area from public works to the fire department. authorizes official acts in connection with the ordinance, affirms the planning department secret determination and makes other findings. madam chair, thank you very much. >> we have a few presentations from the fire public works and planning department but before that i will turn it over to supervisor walton in whose district this project is and thank you chair mcguire. >> it looks like we've got a few items on the agenda this afternoon. one just want to say that this is very important for the city and county of san francisco for the fire department but also exciting for the bay behind his

point community to have the fire training center as someone who has participated in fire ups and had the opportunity of course to learn from our fire department and to see the amazing work that they do every day and community to have a facility like this in your own backyard is something that i think will be benefit to all of our community. >> there are benefits that are coming along with this facility in terms of street improvements ,opportunities for jobs and resources. >> so just wanted to say that i'm happy to be here to support all of these items and look forward to moving these forward. so this state of the art training center can be in our community. >> thank you. thank you so much, supervisor walton the first presenter that we have is gareth miller, assistant deputy chief for the san francisco fire department. >> you have that show whatever you all think. >> yeah because the oc oc

excuse me. >> so yes let's have a planning go first. >> good afternoon supervisors. >> i'll be brief. rebecca salgado planning department staff on october 16th 2025 the planning commission passed a resolution by a vote of 6 to 0 recommending approval of the zoning map amendment ordinance to the board of supervisors. the commission did not request any modifications to the ordinance as proposed this concludes the commission report and i'm available for any questions. >> thank you. okay so we will now have a gareth miller welcome deputy chief. good afternoon super chair melgar supervisors it's a pleasure to be here and thank you for the opportunity to address this legislation and the project that it impacts. as you know since 1866 the san francisco fire department has been protecting lives and property but today we are

truly an all hazards agency. in addition to extinguishing fires or mitigating medical emergencies, behavioral crises and effecting technical rescues. the current fire department training facility was built in 1954 and most of our training occurs at the formal naval facility on treasure island that's scheduled for demolition at a new division of training all of our sfd firefighters, emts and paramedics will begin their service. they'll take up the mission and the values of the fire departments and return throughout their career for skills maintenance updates and professional development. the legislation you're considering is a foundational component of this project which is truly essential for our department and our city. thank you. >> thank you so much. and we have also scott moran from the san francisco department of public works. thank you, madam chair supervisors. i apologize for the miscommunication earlier so

i'll give you a quick overview of the project and the legislation. the project is a consolidation of the two existing training facilities for the san francisco fire department one on treasure island and one in the mission at 19th and folsom. these two facilities are going to be consolidated and moved to a new facility at 1236 carroll avenue in the bayview district. >> this shows a rendering of where the project is or the site is relative to the surrounding area. it is across the slew yosemite slew from hunter's point on the south side and just west of the old candlestick park location. it is directly across from the original alice griffith housing which has since been demolished and the new housing is just to the east or the right of that. this area has the surrounding uses directly to the north is a light industrial pdr two

and then directly to the west is a site owned by a company prologis and it currently does organic material. recycling directly to the east is california state parks land. that land they are eventually planning to build a state park visitor center and then the prologis site to the left has a potential option of building a four story distribution center at that site. directly south is part of the candlestick point redevelopment area a mixed use of housing and high density and then more light industrial to the left. >> the planned buildout of this site puts all of the occupied buildings which are the main classroom, the apparatus building and all the support buildings up against carroll. and then at the back of the property are the unoccupied training structures. there's simulated buildings that are not occupied

and they're only used for training purposes that simulate a variety of different conditions in san francisco. there are all the access to the site will be from carroll avenue, the primary access being on the east side. >> this is a rendering of what the build out will look like. again, the training buildings which are a mix of different kinds of buildings in san francisco in the back on the left and then the occupied buildings more in the red color at the along the front of carroll. the improvements also include all new street improvements and trees along carroll avenue . the this is another rendering showing it from a different perspective looking towards hunter's point. this is the main primary entrance for all vehicles coming and going from the site as well as the public entrance. this is the pedestrian entrance from carroll avenue and then just looking down some of the improvements along carroll avenue. the legislative overview this

site is actually made up of 26 individual parcels on two city blocks and three paper streets streets that have never been built. the total legislation includes the vacation of the three streets and the planning code map amendments to change the zoning from pdr to £0.02 and the bulk height from 40 x to 90 x street vacations. this shows more clearly where those streets are the paper streets that have never been built. three of them and then this shows in perspective of those three streets and they basically because of the landscape and the slopes it'd be very difficult to actually build streets and they would go nowhere because the bay the bay is right there shows another view also showing that it drops off 15ft on the north side. in those paper streets there are some existing utilities. there is a large box newer 18

by 18 that san francisco public utilities commission. and then there's also a three foot six by two foot nine sewer main that runs under griffith street on the far west side of hall street on the left side of the page. you can see the green lines. those are the overhead power lines that feed the two buildings directly to the north of the site. the industrial buildings. for the existing utilities we have met with ppg and e and we have easement language that's incorporated into the ordinance also for puc and pga. we have the easement language for puc. we have a memorandum of understanding that was signed for this property regarding the use of the space and going forward the adjacent landowners who would be affected by the closure these two.

the vacation of these two streets, the state parks to the east and prologis to the last have both written letters of support for the vacation. >> the planning code map amendments. this shows the the site relative to the existing use and the mix of pdr two and p and the plan is to change it all to p. >> the bulk height change is primarily due to the fact that we have two taller training structures one that is a training tower that seven stories tall to simulate an apartment building or an office building and then also a simulator two communications tower 80 foot tall to do rescues of people who might have been electrocuted from a tower. this shows the build out of the site relative to the potential future build out of candlestick park are not a candlestick point development and the building to the south or the east of the site the west of

the site i'm sorry. and then the next page shows sections. this is looking down carol to the east showing the heights relative heights compared to the future development across the street for the candlestick point development. the two taller buildings are purposely pushed as far away from carol. so it's not an imposing element in the design. then looking from carol at the bottom of the page and looking north towards the slew it shows it relative to the potential future building that would be built to the left. this again shows that rendering of the site with the simulated communications tower in the center and then the tall tower for office building simulation community outreach. these are all the different meetings that we've had with the community. the one in particular i wanted to point out was january the number six which was on august 20th. it was a meeting of the bayview

hunters point citizen advisory committee where they voted unanimously early to recommend to the planning commission commission the approval of the planning code map amendments. so in summary the street vacation we have legislation of the street vacations the three paper streets and then the planning code map amendments to change the zoning and the bulk height that is the summary of it. but in addition to that we submitted this morning madam chair, some amendments to the ordinance and those were in response to some comments that we received from jeannie about some specific requests. that was the primary area was focused. i've also been told by the city attorney to point out that based on the street vacation laws, the january 6th meeting that is proposed for the hearing of the street vacation will require the board to sit as a committee of the whole while considering the ordinance

. and that is it and i have opening up for any questions you might have. >> okay. is there are there no more presentations? okay, great. thank you so much. i don't see anyone on the roster with questions or concerns among my colleagues. so with that let's go to public comment on this item please. mr. clerk. >> thank you, madam chair. land use and transportation. we will now hear public comment related to agenda item numbers two, three and four which all relate to the proposed project at 1236 carroll avenue and a potential street vacation order . if you have public comment for these three items please come forward to the lectern at this time. >> madam chair to present those speakers. okay. public comment on this item is now closed. >> supervisor walton did you want to make any further remarks before i make a motion? >> no thank you chair. okay. thank you chair melgar i just want to make sure that obviously these three items go

forward to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> okay. thank you very much supervisor but i because it's a little bit complicated and there's amendments i'm going to take them one by one and so first i would like to make a motion to send item to file number 250821 the resolution of intent street vacation for 1236 carroll avenue to the full board of supervisors with a positive recommendation as a committee report as amended we have an amended it yes okay. i'm sorry let's do the amendment first. sorry let's do the amendment as was circulated madam chair, agenda item number two is the resolution that schedules the committee of the whole among other things and the amendment that would be necessary for agenda item number two is just to slot in the date in time for that committee of the whole hearing dates that we can conduct all of our noticing it fills in a blank that is on the notice.

>> so let's take a vote on that first on the amendment. >> thank you. and the date and time that's proposed is january sixth. >> it is a first meeting of the year for the point meeting is 3 p.m. on a motion offered by chair melgar to amend agenda item number two to include the committee of the whole hearing date vice chair chin chin i remember mahmood mahmood i chair i melgar i madam chair three eyes on the amendments thank you so that motion passes. so now let's go to item number two file number 250821 as amended i'd like to make a motion that we send it out as a committee report to tomorrow's meeting on the motion by the chair that the resolution in agenda item number two be recommended as a committee report as amended for consideration tomorrow. vice chair chin chin i'm going mahmood i chairman ogar i melgar madam chair, there are

three eyes on that motion. >> that motion passes. thank you. and now i would like to make a motion to send item number three file number 250823 the planning code zoning map at four 1236 carroll avenue to the full board of supervisors meeting on tuesday, january 6th, 2026 with a positive recommendation on the motion offered by the chair. that agenda item number three be sent with the recommendation of land use and transportation for consideration at the board meeting on january 6th, 2026. vice chair chin chin i'm mahmood mahmood i chair melgar i melgar i madam chair there are three eyes on that motion that motion passes so now item number four file number 25082 for the street vacation order and interpret part mental property transfer for 1236 carol avenue i'd like to make a

motion to adopt the amendment as read into the record for item number four on the motion offered by the chair that agenda item number four be amended as presented by the department vice chair chin chin i am member mahmood mahmood i chair melgar i melgar i madam chair there are three eyes thank you. >> and finally i'd like to make a motion to send item number four file number 250 8 to 4 as amended to the full board meeting on tuesday january 6th without a recommendation as amended on the motion offered by the chair. >> that agenda item number four be sent as amended for consideration by the board on january 6th, 2025 without the recommendation of land use and transportation. vice chair chin chin i member mahmood mahmood i chair melgar i melgar i madam chair there are three eyes on that motion. >> okay that motion passes. thank you. >> thank you supervisor walton the next 102 okay. all right.

thank you. let's go to item number five please. >> agenda item number five is an ordinance delegating authority to the public works director to vacate certain streets and public service easements in the petro hope s.f. project site generally bounded by 26 wisconsin 23rd missouri 22nd texas 25th and connecticut south of 25th streets including portions of 22nd 23rd, 25th 26th arkansas. connecticut. dakota. texas. missouri. wisconsin streets turner terrace and watchman way. to expedite implementation of the hope s.f. project it authorizes the city to transfer its interest in the vacation area to the san francisco housing authority or the project sponsor delegating to the director of property authority to grant, accept and terminate easements to facilitate the street vacations it adopts a public works order recommending the street and easement vacation processes waives application of administrative code chapter 23

regarding real estate transactions to the extent inconsistent with the ordinance finds that the street vacation areas are exempt surplus property under the california surplus land act authorizes other official acts as defined within the ordinance in connection and adopts findings under sequoyah as well as findings of consistency with the general plan and the priority policies. the planning code section one a 1.1. this item is also on our agenda as a potential committee report and it may be sent for consideration by the board during their meeting tomorrow december 9th, 2020 five. >> thank you so much mr. clerk. we have seana yates here from public works. >> welcome. okay. good afternoon supervisors melgar chen and mahmud. my name is shannon gate sam, a project manager with public works. i'm joined today with colleagues from the mayor's office of housing and community

development public works subdivision and mapping and the potrero hope a safe development partner who are available to after this presentation to answer any questions you may have. today i'll be presenting on a proposed ordinance that will delegate authority to the director of public works and the director of real estate to approve vacation of certain street and public service easements in the potrero hope development area to facilitate implementation of the development agreement. potrero hope s.f. received approval of a development agreement in 2017 and is proceeding in phases to complete the redevelopment and reconstruction of new public streets, utilities and open spaces within the 38 acre site. the infrastructure phase one is complete and phase two is nearing completion. demolition of existing unoccupied buildings in the phase three area will be completed next year. >> the graphic on the right shows in bold dash line the picture of hope a safe development boundary and the existing streets that will be vacated in the future subject to this ordinance are shown in gray. the anticipated phase lines are also shown in for reference

this ordinance proposes to delegate authority to the public works director to vacate streets and public service easements within the potrero hope a safe development boundary and delegate authority to the director of property to execute and record deeds for transferring interest in the vacated area to the housing authority or project sponsor to facilitate the development agreement and grant accept and terminate easements needed for street vacations. >> this ordinance would also perform other related actions listed on the slide including waiving any conflicts of the administrative code. chapter 23 declaring the vacated areas exempt from surplus property authorizing necessary official acts to implement the ordinance, adopt secor findings and confirm consistency with the city's general plan and planning code. >> the proposed delegation delegation has been recommended for approval by both the planning department and director of real estate and is supported by most key housing authority of san francisco and the development partner as evidenced by support

letters found in the items board file under the current process and without this legislation each application for street vacation requires full board approval by ordinance which takes at least six months from date of application because the development is proceeding in phases. >> multiple phases of street vacations would be required under the proposed delegation of authority public works would be able to evaluate applications, coordinate with the affected city departments and make determinations for street and easement vacations without requiring further board authorization. >> this would greatly reduce the amount of time and effort involved for approvals required to support the development. this ordinance ordinance recognizes the necessity of street and easement vacations within the development area to fulfill the intent of the development agreement and deliver new public streets and utilities that will support new housing and public spaces. >> public works would continue to review applications and perform the same steps to evaluate for approval including

conducting a public hearing confirming the street or easement vacation facilitates delivery of the project and is appropriate based on phasing incorporates any necessary conditions including provision of easements or access requirements and also confirming all the conditions that would have been required for board approval including making findings and under the california streets and highways code approving and sewer map and legal descriptions for the areas to be vacated assigning apms for the affected parcels, obtaining planning department's general plan consistency and scope findings and that the developer has demonstrated a good faith effort effort to obtain consent from the adjacent property owners once this process of completed public works would then issue and record an order approving the vacation with any required conditions. >> i hope today's presentation has demonstrated the benefits of the proposed legislation to facilitate and expedite the redevelopment of the potrero hope s.f. project and request

that the committee move this ordinance forward to the full board with a positive recommendation. thank you. i'll take any questions you have. >> thank you so much miss gates. that was a very thorough presentation. i appreciate it. let's i don't see anyone on the roster with questions so let's go to public comment on this item please. >> land use and transportation you will now hear public comment related to agenda item number five street vacation for various streets related to the petra hope s.f. project. if you have public comment for this item please come forward to the lectern at this time. madam chair, it appears we have no speakers. >> public comment on this item is now closed so i would like to make a motion to send this item to the full board with a positive recommendation as a committee report a motion offered by the chair that this ordinance be recommended as a committee report. vice chair chen chen i member muhammad mahmud i chair melgar

i melgar i met i'm sure there are three eyes i think you that motion passes let's go to item number six police agenda item number six is an ordinance amending the planning code to allow additional uses as principally or conditionally permitted in historic buildings citywide exempt historic buildings in certain eastern neighborhood plan areas from conditional use authorization otherwise required to remove production distribution and repair institutional community and arts activities uses and from providing replacement space for such uses. make conforming amendments to provisions affected by the foregoing including zoning control tables. it also affirms the planning department score determination and makes findings of consistency with the general plan in the party policies and planning code section 121.1 as well as findings of public necessity convenience and general welfare under planning code section 302. like the previous item this item is on our agenda as a potential committee report and may be sent for consideration by the board at their meeting tomorrow,

december 6th, 2025. >> it is on our agenda as a committee report but it's the the we have gotten a request from the mayor's office to continue this item to the call up the chair so that we can work out some details particularly as it pertains to buildings in districts nine and 11 as i understand it. >> is there anything that you want to add? ms. gluckstein no, that's correct. >> we are requesting a continuance and thank you for your work with us on that. supervisor melgar i just wanted to mention for the public who might be tuning in that we we do plan to incorporate amendments coming out of the recommendations from the public at the last hearing to specify that formulary tail hotel uses and cannabis uses in chinatown. but working with district 11 supervisor chen citywide to ensure that cannabis uses those controls would not change as as would be the case for hotel

uses and formula retail uses so we're working on those amendments and appreciate your patience with this ordinance. >> thank you. thank you. ms. cox thanks so let's go ahead and take public comment where it can continue this item and i will make a motion after public comment. >> land use and transportation will now hear public comment related to agenda item number six adaptive reuse for historic buildings. if you have public comment for this item please come forward to the lectern at this time we may have a speaker approaching . >> afternoon supervisor cynthia gomez you know here local two so if i understand the announcement right this what i'm about to say is moot and will mostly apply whenever this is reheard but wanted to just flag that i think our issues as the last time the last time as regards to hotel use were amended and so assuming that that we are that

we'll get a chance to read them we will have read them before the next hearing and it sounds like there'll be more to discuss as well. so i think that that's all we need to say now and we will be back whenever this is reheard. >> thank you, ms. gomez do we have any further speakers for agenda item number six, madam chair okay. >> public comment on the site is now closed and i would like to make a motion that we continue this item to the call of the chair on the motion offered by chair melgar that this ordinance be continued to the call the chair vice chair chin chin i remember mohamad mahmood i chair melgar i melgar i madam chair there are three eyes in queue that motion passes at let's go to item number seven please agenda item number seven is an ordinance amending the planning code to first require property owners seeking to demolish residential units to replace all units that are being demolished.

second, require relocation assistance to affected occupants of those units into former occupants who vacated due to harassment improper buyout agreements owner moving owner move ins pursuant to the lease act or other serious and imminent hazards with additional assistance and protections for lower income tenants. third, modify the planning code definition of demolition. fourth, modify the conditional use criteria that apply to projects to demolish residential units amending the administrative code to fifth require landlords to provide additional relocation assistance to lower income tenants who are being required to vacate temporarily due to capital improvements or rehabilitation work. sixth update the standards and procedures for hearings related to tenant harassment. seventh require additional disclosures and buyout agreements. eighth require an additional disclosure in notice of intent to withdraw units under the ellis act ninth making various

non substantive changes and clarifications affirming the planning department secret determination making other findings throughout the ordinance. >> madam chair thank you so much mr. clerk. >> supervisor chen the floor is yours. >> thank you. supervisor thank you chairman for calling it i really appreciate all your collaborations as we moved this legislation closer to the final form and i understand that supervisor mal gars amendments are also ready today to present and final committee to be considered but before we move those amendments my office would like to work on additional standards to achieve deeper affordability in parity equity geographies since we my office don't have this amendments ready. so i would like to require referral back to the planning commissions. so i would like to make a request to duplicate the file today and with that i pass back the four to you supervisor malka to present your amendments. >> thank you. okay. thank you so much supervisor

chen and it has been a complicated set of circumstances and complicated legislation. i'm so grateful to you and your staff for tackling it and including so many people in the discussion really particularly grateful also to milana and the planning department for all her work in our city attorneys who have worked overtime on this one. >> so i'm grateful for that. unfortunately this piece of legislation didn't receive as much you know, press as the family zoning plan and it's too bad because i think this will be by far more impactful and it covers the entire city as it should have. you know, years ago. and i appreciate everybody's work and very much appreciate the patience of the advocates who have put in also long hours and to getting this right. there are provisions here such as assistance for tenants

temporarily moving out for capital prepayments for fire damage that are long overdue. i think in all of our districts we've experienced this and i'm happy that we had this vehicle to improve things for tenants on those long standing situations. i have some friendly amendments as you alluded supervisor chen which were drafted in partnership with the advocate and thank you again to the city attorney for all their work. they are substantive so they are going to have to sit for a week before we vote on them. >> the first amendment starts on page 13. >> it is to rejigger the conditional use criteria that the planning commission uses when granting demolition permission so that three of them are now require permits in order to be granted permits rather than options. >> the three criteria have to do with first complying with the relocation assistance for tenant not harassing tenants and third properly filing a buyout agreement with a rent

board. then on page 1617 and the s toeterminet the planning whether a project has reached a threshold of 70% that are also reordered after an h. then on page 21 section 317.2 would be amended so that the landlord who conducted a good faith buyout but failed to do so perfectly can petition the rent board to ruled that they substantively complied with the spirit of 37.9 e's buyout requirement and on page 55 the process for a landlord to petition the rent board is described and also sets a timeline to make this decision in that completes my amendments. i don't know if you have any further comments on that. >> supervisor chen okay, so if that is the case and i don't see anyone else on the roster and there's no other questions ,let's go to public comment on

this item please. >> mr. clerk thank you madam chair. land use and transportation will now hear public comment related to agenda item number seven tenant protection ordinance if you have public comment for this item please come forward to the lectern that i'm pointing out with my left hand. and if you're waiting for your chance to speak you can line up to speak along that wall but please come forward you the first speaker you may begin. >> good afternoon supervisor zack eisenberger with young community developers. we want to thank supervisors chen and melgar for their diligent work on this critical legislation. we also want to thank supervisor chen and the committee for moving to duplicate the file which we hope happens which will enable us to continue developing pig specific demolition protections a critical component of this legislation. strengthening pig specific safeguards would fulfill the core purpose of these designations protecting communities that have shouldered much of the city's growth while experiencing the greatest inequities. we also want to voice our strong support for rep's request to continue tightening the demolition definition. fully closing loopholes related to renovictions is vital to

ensure tenants are not displaced through construction practices that circumvent the intent of the ordinance. thank you again and we hope to move this work forward with the duplicated file and we look forward to continuing our collaboration to ensure strong equitable protections for tenants and parks. >> thank you. thank you for your comments. next speaker please. >> madam chair, members of the committee can fujioka in with chinatown committee development center and also with the san francisco anti displacement coalition. i want to express our appreciation for both supervisor melgar insofar as the chen for working on this complex piece of legislation and recognize the staff that have put in an extraordinary hours. i know we just got amendments about well at 1:00 today we're looking through them and you know, i have to say it looks looks good to us and on on first of you i think you know,

i think the whole project this whole challenge of of trying to one of the one of the key challenges it is the threat of evictions displacement in the city is so high it's increasing today and we're we we in the it is enormously challenging to protect tenants against all the pressures that the new incentives for development create. so but i i want to again appreciate the efforts to to address those issues and anticipate those challenges in advance so we understand this will be coming back next week and but again, thank you all for your work. thank you for your comments. do we have anyone else to this public comment for agenda item number seven? >> okay. public comment on this item is now closed. so mr. clerk, as i heard it a supervisor vice chair chen wants to duplicate the file

before we make the amendments and refer it back to planning to talk further about priority equity geography is can we do that so that would mean that the version of the ordinance that we have right now with no other amendments gets referred back to the commission for consider that that way will be different from the amended file that we vote on. >> deputy deputy city attorney brad rusty i think the committee could amend the duplicate file next year and have that amended version go back to planning for consideration or i or i could be i guess referred back now and have those amendments discussed there before coming back to the board when they're made unless the clerk disagrees with that procedure i think normally the amendments would be made here and then sent to planning if it required referral back. >> correct. but the amendments that we're making today are do not need to go back to planning.

the amendments that need to go back to planning have not yet been written but it is about the you know having further protections in geographe feet priority equity geography areas which is a different concept, right. i understand that. i'm just saying it normally i think the amendments would be made to the duplicate here and then referred back to the commission for consideration but i think this procedure will work. >> i think this will work. yeah. okay. so i'm recording a duplicate of the item that is on our agenda presently unamended. >> that's where we're at so far and that was at the request of supervisor chen and then for the original file i would like to make a motion that we adopt the amendments as i read into the record place on the motion that the original file be amended as presented by chair melgar vice chair chen chen i remember mahmood mahmood i chair melgar i melgar i madam chair there are three eyes on

that amendment thank you and since my amendments are substantive i would like to continue this item to the meeting of monday december 15th as amended on the motion by the chair that the original file be continued as amended for consideration in next week's land use and transportation committee meeting december 15th, 2025 vice chair chen chen i remember mahmood mahmood i chair melgar i melgar madam chair there are three eyes on that motion thank you and let's go to item number eight please. we still have the matter of the duplicate file which i recommend that you continue to the call the chair. >> i'm sorry. yes. let's continue the duplicated file to the call of the chair on the motion that the duplicated file be continued to the call the chair vice chair chen chen i member mahmood mahmood i chair melgar i melgar i met him chair there are three eyes thank you thank you.

okay now let's go to item number eight please agenda item number eight is a hearing on the status of san francisco's electric vehicle curbside charging feasibility study status of the electric vehicle curbside charging pilot next steps for implementation of a scalable public electric vehicle curbside charging program and requesting the mta department of the environment, public works and public utilities commission to report . thank you. this is very exciting and we are now joined by board president rafael mandel min. the floor is yours. >> thank you chair melgar and thank you colleagues for making time on your agenda today to hear from our city departments about the city's efforts to roll out ev curbside charging. this is an a topic i've been interested in for some time mainly because i hear from i constituents on a regular basis wondering why we don't have it

when they see other cities in the united states and in her nationally moving forward with curbside ev charging it's a conversation that i started having more earnestly with mta and department of environment and other departments back in 2023 and we work we're work began working with them on asking them to look more systematically at opportunities for implementing a scalable ev curbside charging program in san francisco in march of last year we we passed a resolution supporting the efforts of the department at that time to implement a curbside ev charging feasibility study that they actually had already begun and urging the office of the mayor and departments to leverage all available funding sources to implement a curbside ev charging pilot program this

year. >> the study was completed earlier this year and i believe today we're going to be hearing about what that study found and the mayor the prior mayor last year got a jump on the pilot and rolled that working with departments the mayor's office joe swiss at the time rolled out a pilot inviting ev companies to make proposals to put their chargers on our on our sidewalks. in april of this year we saw a cop we saw a couple of those chargers roll out. we're going to hear more today about that pilots about what they've learned about where we're going from here and how we get more of these on our

sidewalks. >> so with that i believe we have nicole appen zeller senior clean transportation special list at s.f. environment who will kick us off. >> great. good afternoon to providers. before i begin i just want to confirm that our presentation is working and as effective you will be. >> please display the slides. there we go. great. thank you again. my name is nicole lapin. zeller and i serve as the city's electric vehicle ombudsperson at the environment department. i'm here today on behalf of our inner agency city team working on curbside ev charging in san francisco. and i'll be presenting alongside broderick paolo from s.f. mta. and i'm joined by colleagues from sfe, mta, dpw and sfp c to help us field questions. we're also joined by shannon delaney from it's electric who will also be presenting on their experience on the curbside pilot as a current office of emerging technology

permitting. this joint presentation is in response to supervisor raymond coleman's resolution calling for a curbside charging feasibility study. >> our goals today are to provide context for why a curbside charging is important. sure findings from the feasibility study and demonstration pilot and outline our next steps for building a long term program. our role at the san francisco environment department is to act as san francisco's climate accountability coordination and equity engine. this work is guided by the city's clean transportation commitments in the 2021 climate action plan. as a transit first city we prioritized walking, biking, rolling and transit. but at the same time we recognize that many residents, commuters and visitors still rely on vehicles where vehicles are necessary. we want them to be zero emissions. our targets are ambitious. 25% of registered private vehicles are electric vehicles by 2030 and 100% by 2040. >> to reach these goals we must

ensure the right charging infrastructure is in place. a 2020 international council on clean transportation study found that san francisco will need 1760 public chargers by 2030. we currently have 1067 level two chargers and 237 dc fast chargers installed. that leaves the need for about two excuse me for about 450 additional chargers within the next five years. an mta recently secured funding to install 250 level two chargers in city owned parking garages which will make a significant contribution toward meeting our 2030 goals. curbside charging is just one small piece of the puzzle. a robust network must also include home, workplace fleet and public charging. much of the expansion will happen off street at city owned garages, retail parking lots and fast charging hubs. these sites generally have fewer traffic or jurisdictional conflicts but are often far away from where residents live and park and may require drivers to charge during costly

peak hours. that's where curbside charging fills the gap. it offers the closest option to at home charging for the 60% of san franciscans who rent or live in multifamily housing without dedicated parking. our rough target is 100 curbside chargers by 2030 to help meet this near home need. to date the city has taken several steps. we've completed the charging the curbside charging feasibility study to explore business models and identify priorities sites. we've launched the mayor's demonstration pilot which created a new permitting pathway and brought in vendor funded pilot sites. we've secured 150,000 of prop l funding through s.f. cta to support a portion of long term planning and implementation. and right now we are finalizing the demonstration pilot installations and shifting toward citywide planning. this next phase will focus on establishing a permitting pathway site selection process and partnership model for long term deployment based on lessons learned from the study and pilot. our goals for a citywide curbside program include

prioritizing overnight charging for renters and multifamily residents without onsite charging by focusing on lower power level two chargers in locations with a high density of renters and multi-unit dwellings and avoiding commercial corridors. planning for demand while also ensuring equitable equitable deployment that means prioritizing areas with high charging needs but also encouraging deployment in underserved neighborhoods both where charging is limited today and in vehicle reliant areas where vendors may be hesitant to invest their own dollars. part of evaluating any new sites will involve community engagement to better understand what the community wants. we also want to establish clear expectations for private providers using and curb such a site siting criteria and community outreach requirements so they can bring forward well-prepared projects that they will own and operate. and creating a permitting framework including a long term permitting solution and operating terms that address driver access, pricing, maintenance licensing and potential revenue sharing. with that i'll turn it over to broderick paolo from sfm to to

dive deeper into the findings of the feasibility study and the demonstration pilot. >> thanks, nicole. >> good afternoon supervisors. my name is broderick pollo and i'm a planner s.f. mta on the parking care management team. and i've had the pleasure of serving as the project manager for the pilot program. >> today i'm thrilled to be providing you with a high level overview of the feasibility study and providing a brief overview of the pilot. the study sponsored by president randleman explored whether it was feasible from an operational, financial and regulatory perspective to install, maintain and operate a public facing charging network at the curb. >> the study identifies the risks and opportunities of operating a curbside network and identified practical solutions and recommendations to help advance the network beyond the pilot phase. of course lessons learned from the pilot were incorporated into the study. >> overall we found that the biggest challenges is navigating the complex permitting and regulatory process.

additionally, we can expect hurdles with the electrical grid both in terms of readiness and overall capacity. >> these factors reinforce the need to site intentionally building not just individual chargers but a connected network. the good news is is that our thank you. >> the good news is that our analysis shows revenue generation is feasible for both the city and the vendors provided implementation is thoughtful and strategic. >> as you are well aware there are a suite of agencies that have the authority and jurisdiction over the public right of way adjacent private parcels and the energy grid. the cast of characters includes public works, s.f. mta, db ii, sfp c and pge. >> despite these complex conditions the city has experience and a track record of working with private vendors in these complex spaces. examples of these partnerships include the bike share program, the car share program and the

city's contractual relationship with vendors such as j.c. taco . one of the recommendations from this study is to develop a long term curbside ev permitting pathway. this effort must identify clear roles including a lead agency responsible for coordinating and implementing the legislative changes to support a permitting process with key approvals and a partnership model. >> the study conducted a citywide suitability analysis that found every district has a viable curb for ev charging. >> the consultant arab used several data layers including existing parking regulations, ev registrations, grid capacity, multiple unit density and equity indicators to help identify suitable locations. the map and analysis assumes that areas with metered parking bikeways, daylighting zones and color curbs are incompatible with charging infrastructure. it will also be important to consider local block level

conditions and community readiness as we look to site charging stations in the future . >> in june of 2024 we launched a pilot with the spirit of learn by doing to begin testing a variety of curbside charging models. we designed the program to be technology agnostic which gave the vendors the flexibility to bring in a variety of curbside charging products that includes chargers mounted to existing utility poles, pedestal chargers and an even a bring your own cord model like the one shown here which is san francisco's first station operated by its electric. >> now vendors who meet our program guidelines propose sites that work best for their technology. their proposals must account for accessibility, avoid transit or bike conflicts and consider a range of parking configurations from parallel angled and perpendicular. >> once a site is approved the vendor takes on full responsibility to own install operate and maintain these

chargers. to energize the chargers vendors have one of two options. they can either establish a new service directly with pge or p c or they can tap into excess panel capacity from a nearby property. for the demonstration pilot public works issued an emerging technology permit. the initial permit lasts for two years with the option of it being extended to ten. the emerging technology permit is available as a short term permitting mechanism to test out new innovations with the goal of informing the development of new permits that may be needed. we are now at the stage we need to establish a long term permitting solution for curbside charging. to scale programing. and finally a few other permits are needed to make this work. excavation permits from public works if the public if the project requires trenching electrical permits from db ii, etc. to legislation to designate the curb or the exclusive use of ev charging

and verification from the utility of new electrical services needed. >> the pilot is currently working to complete one demonstration site with each of our approved vendors. it's electric urban e.v. and volt post to date we've reviewed about 60 five sites from these vendors and have two sites in progress and one is operational. site selection is challenging as providers need to consider existing street furniture, vertical clearances and power connection. >> one of the biggest takeaways from the pilot is that vendors need clear up front requirements from the city to inform site selection. even with these guidelines, site selection often requires close collaboration as each site is unique. now as we plan for the future of curbside charging we can build on the following siting principles from the pilot. first focus on demand placing chargers without actually be used. second avoid conflicts with existing or planned street uses like transit lanes or bikeways.

third prioritize locations with a high density of renters and multi-unit buildings and avoid commercial corridors. finally consider underserved areas with limited charging and high vehicle reliance. right now we're working with urban v and volt post to finalize site selection and we expect those last two pilot sites to be operational within the next 6 to 9 months. next month urban tv will be seeking mta board approval for a potential site in the dogpatch. and volt post is currently working with sfp c and pge to assess two different potential sites once those sites are established. the city team will wrap up the pilot by ensuring vendors are maintaining their infrastructure monitoring pattern usages, conducting a community survey and making adjustments to improve performance as needed. of course these data driven insights will directly inform the design of the future citywide program. >> to date we've been able to

utilize 311 reporting data driver feedback and support from our parking control officers to begin implementing changes at our first site to foster higher utilization. and now i'll hand it over to shannon from it's electric to share their perspectives and lessons learned on the first site. i would like to note that it's electric will be speaking in its capacity as a current office of emerging technology committee reporting on its experience so far. >> thank you broderick and hello supervisors. my name is shannon and i am the director of public affairs for its electric. it's electric's first of a kind approach to curbside ev charging has enabled us to provide the first curbside chargers in the city of san francisco in 2025. as you've heard, the city identified grid access and readiness as a challenge in the deployment of public charging. this is a problem not isolated to just san francisco. it is a leading issue cities across the country are facing in scaling ev charging infrastructure. this boils down to the complexity of coordination time

and cost around connecting to the grid. it's electric identified this and in response created the first charging system that avoids this issue and allows public chargers to be powered instead by the extra capacity in buildings. the second issue we identified to solve was charger downtime caused by failure or vandalism of attached cables. and so we imported the european solution of a detachable cables . we send drivers a free lightweight cable to charge with that they keep and carry in their car. this also makes us fully interoperable no adapters needed from drivers as with other public charging solutions . but back to building power an incredible side effect is that this allows us to be the only community requested charging solution when we scale in a city we crowdsource site locations which we then share with our city partners for approval. >> building power also allows us to have chargers in the ground fast in only two days after permits and approvals are granted. this is critical as low cost and high speed are the key drivers to scale.

next on finance our model is one that is at no cost to the city taxpayers utility or the property owner. we pay our electricity use from that charger directly to the utility and with the revenue we earn we share 20% of it back to the building owner. >> this pilot was designed to have the selected vendors share data to iterate with speed and agility with the city. we were able to do just that in the first four weeks making two key changes to ensure the success of these stations. the first challenge was the spots were often blocked by gas powered vehicles or by evs that were parked but not plugged in to charge. the solution serviced was enforcement by 70 from driver reporting to 311. and next the spots were painted to visually underscore that these are reserved spots for ev charging only. the second issue is that the original pricing structure had drivers paying based on the time they were plugged in rather than by kilowatt hour . >> based on driver feedback and in coordination with the city we made the switch in 24 hours. utilization has moved from 10%

to almost 56% in just six months. to underscore how remarkable that says it took new york city's curbside pilot on a much larger scale of deployment over two years to reach the same level of utilization as san francisco did in just four months. the city sfm and mta, department of environment and supervisor randleman and his office deserve to be commended for it for this work. >> its electric is here to support san francisco's curbside charging goals and growth. in the six months we've been in the ground over 125 buildings have signed up to power a charger and receive revenue share. 100 drivers have signed up to use the active chargers with another 140 drivers waiting for us to expand. both active ev drivers and more importantly aspiring ev drivers who are waiting for infrastructure in order to make the switch. thank you so much for your time and i'll pass it back to you. >> broderick. >> thank you shannon. as we work with the remaining providers to complete two more

pilots, the city team is transitioning to focusing on developing a long term permitting process to support citywide curbside expansion. in the last two months we've worked across departments to identify agency roles for a citywide curbside planning. mta will be leading project development management and operations for a new citywide program led by mta's taxi access and mobility services team also known as thames. mta will lead on developing a long term permitting pathway, a revenue model and operational terms. >> public works will support all processes and permits for operation within the public right of way and provide input on site selection requirements . sfe will provide ev charging subject matter expertise to advise on policy development research outreach and monitoring and evaluation practices. spc will provide utility expertise to help shape site

screening and eligibility by combining operational expertise permitting authority utility planning and ev technical knowledge. we are working together to create a program stronger than any single department could have done alone. now as we move to the next phase of the program we'll use available prop l funding to support essential planning and establish a strong foundation for citywide expansion and key priority is creating a long term permit and streamlining inner agency processes to the extent possible so providers have a predicted, predictable, coordinated path for deploying curbside charging. we're also developing a consistent site selection framework to ensure locations are feasible, equitable and responsive to community needs. we're developing a mapping tool providers can use to inform this site selection. in parallel we're exploring mechanisms to identify vendors capable of operating a reliable well maintained network that

also supports a sustainable revenue approach. throughout this work we remain committed to ongoing engagement with communities and stakeholders to guide deployment and build public trust underpinned all of these priorities as a strong cross agency collaboration bringing together mta public works, sfe and cpc to create a scalable and resilient curbside charging program aligned with the city's long term mobility and climate goals. >> and lastly if any ev charging company would like more information on the city's long term permitting program which is currently under development, they should visit sfm ta's curbside website to sign up for our distribution list and mta will reach out to those companies once there is more information about the long term program. that concludes our presentation and thank you very much. >> thank you. president mendelsohn thank you chairman gar and thank you for

. thanks to everyone who's been involved in the feasibility study and the pilot. >> i do have some questions. >> so one relates to the scale and timing of the goal. so the feasibility study determined that we need 100 curbside chargers and i wonder if you could talk a little bit about that because it seems like a low number to me but you're also in setting the goal of having that done by 2030 which seems like a rather long time out to me. and so could you talk a little bit more about the hundred and a little bit more about the 2030? >> yeah, i can speak to that. so as we were developing our 2030 goals we wanted to just take into account what other charging projects are underway or what we think might be realistic in the off streets space. >> as mentioned we were successful in working with mta

to access funding of 2.3 million to help install 250 new level two chargers in off street city owned garages. >> and since we needed to develop a long term permitting strategy in order to scale curbside, we wanted to make sure that our goal was reasonable and determined. 100 to be a reasonable goal over this five year period so that in the next five years we could also collect data and if we're able to you know, go past that goal that will be excellent that will continue to help support our goals for charging and expansion as we move to 2040. but we wanted to make sure that our goal was realistic with what we could do based off of our current status transitioning from a pilot to a citywide program which requires significant upfront work as we establish that long term permitting pathway. >> and i appreciate that.

i do. i mean i just think there's and i'd be curious i mean i assume that these two chargers into both triangle are showing there's demand. >> you're nodding yes. yeah well it's showing extreme extremely good demand with 60% utilization thus far. >> but we have also recognized that, you know, curbside charging projects can be a little bit more complex based off of, you know, the the model and where the utility interconnection is. so we're still gathering data as we deploy the remaining two stations with our approved vendors urban ev and volt post. >> so we're still evaluating, you know, how we can scale this model further and that's why we focused on that goal of 100 chargers to help meet that near home demand knowing that we will need to expand that goal as we set our eyes on 2040 with 100% electrification.

>> you know and i recognize that there's many ways to meet our need for chargers to support people moving to electric vehicles. and it may be you know that curbside charging is not going to be a huge chunk of that effort. >> however, i'm it is it seems like potentially an elegant solution for people who live in multifamily buildings that don't have chargers and that and it has been sort of identified in city documents going back at least to 2019 if not prior to that as something that we wanted to explore. >> so i guess i just want to while you know, expressing gratitude for the work you've done sort of also express urgency around moving more

quickly to deploy more and trying to make that more of a priority. >> and i'm hoping that the administration and you know, i've had some conversations with lisa jean-baptiste. >> i'm hoping that the administration if if they believe in you believe that these curbside chargers are part of the ev solution that we should move more quickly than 100 by 2030 and maybe that's 100 by 2028? i don't know but it seems like we should move more quickly than we are moving. but then i want to get into a little bit about why things seem to be going rather slowly. so we have two that went out in april. none have been deployed since then. right. although we do apparently have a lot of interest coming. well, i don't know if we have a lot of interest. can you talk more about why this is hard and what's taking so long? >> yes. so as brodrick noted, we've received over 65 applications

and to date across our three approved curbside charging vendors. >> and something that is difficult is site selection. so we've been able to work closely with each approved vendor to provide them with key requirements. >> but it does get tricky as we're navigating this for the first time through the demonstration pilot. and each site is different. so what might work for one block doesn't necessarily work for the other. additionally, another added layer that can complicated is there's different technology types that we're currently experimenting with so for example one of our approved vendors is called volt post and their lamp post mounted chargers. so they're looking at lampposts and where those are located. so each site selection process requires determining you know if there's the curb use is

viable for curbside but we also need to take into account things like existing street furniture where utility interconnection point is and things like vertical clearance which complicate it and lead to a lengthier site selection process and assessment process. so we have some lessons learned over the last year but that also some of that information that informed that 2030 goal of 100 you know we want to be realistic with how fast we've been able to move to date. do you think you're close to having more moving out or. >> yes. we estimate that the next two sites will be available and within nine months we have big target to hopefully open the next two sites by climate action month and week. >> so we're excited to move those forward. but that is you know, after a long process with both of the

remaining vendors that have gone back to assess multiple sites for each of those vendors. so it hasn't been cut and dry for the site selection process . do you have thoughts about how to speed this up? because two a year feels inadequate or like this is like not if this is a project we should take on. we should be doing it more quickly. if it's a project we shouldn't take on, we should cut bait and have folks working on other things. >> so gee, do you have a sense of whether we're going to be able to move things along more quickly than two a year or what really is inhibiting that? >> yes, i agree we are moving too slowly as electric vehicle ombudsperson i want all of the charging infrastructure in the ground now but we do know that this is a gap that we need to fill close to home charging solutions are going to be critical for our residents

especially when public charging can oftentimes be less convenient and more expensive. >> i don't doubt that you share the urgency around it. what i'm not getting is the is this a gap we can close and what's the problem? i mean if i think this is a problem do you think it's a problem? how do we how do we get it done more expeditiously? >> like what's going to be the thing that makes that happen? establishing a long term permitting pathway so that site vendors can apply to specific site criteria set by the city and can apply for more than one permit moving forward. so as we transition to citywide planning we want to open up that permitting pathway so each vendor can apply for more than one site at once and we've received input from each of the curbside vendors that they want to scale and do something like you know, 20 sites each. so by opening that pathway,

that permitting pathway we're going to be allowing that permit pathway to move faster. and as we determine the final technology needs for the remaining two vendors, we'll have a good blueprint that we can follow and we can establish which technologies we can pursue as we open the citywide . >> maybe you can explain how that's going to help to me because i had understood that this emerging technologies permit was, you know, a great way of speeding things up and and that that was responsible for the relatively quick approval of the the two chargers we have. but it seems like it's kind of somehow gotten bogged bogged down and city permitting is not necessarily expeditious. >> so how do we think the pathway the permitting pathway that is going to be created i guess under mta maybe this should be an mta problem or question?

>> so so one of the i mean one of the recommendations in the feasibility study is expedite permitting and improve oversight and talks about the need to identify a lead agency. and i guess part of the work leading up to this hearing has been mta sort of perhaps grudgingly or perhaps happily but being willing to like take on the responsibility for this project because it has felt like nobody has wanted to be the lead on on ev curbside permitting. but maybe can you talk like what how do we make this an expeditious process that results in more than to have curbside charges chargers a year? >> hi, thank you. i'm katie and i'm the director of the taxes access and mobility services program at the s.f. mta. >> how did you get stuck with us and we are excited and we are stepping in and stepping up and exciting thank you and of

you know are strongly committed to the goal to the project and we're thankful that this is one part of the solution and nicole talked about that because we do have a lot of factors that are complicated and having a long term permitting process doesn't necessarily mean it is going to be faster than the permitting process. thankfully we're building on the great work and the lessons learned of the team and the collaboration. so we're not starting from zero but we do need to level set on expectations and say we are committed to the work, we're committed to going faster and we will look for all those opportunities to create a more efficient process. >> but permitting in the city is complicated and the slide that brody laid out with the cast of characters with the agencies that need to issue permits that will remain and i

don't know if that's a choice for us right. well there it is how our city is structured. so there's charter authority for various city agencies to issue permits within their purview. right? so that is established. mta is not going to issue a p u c permit or idbi permit. but what we are going to do is we're going to be the front door for the permitting process and we will work to create streamlined process on our side and create a process where we approve eligible vendors and then they will need to go get the the permits as applicable applicable as may be needed. right. so it might be there's trenching involved and they're going to have to go to public works for that excavation

permit. so what we're hoping to do is make it clear have a clear front door for interested vendors and be clear with upfront requirements. create a mapping tool which again we've we talked about as part of the presentation but it is a complicated process when you're putting something in the public right of way that requires you know, power and attachment to the grid. it's it is just a complicated endeavor. i get it. and yet somehow cities are managing to do this. >> yeah so we will and if there's a problem with if all over the world if it is a problem with our charter i mean we have all sorts of conversations about charter reform happening over this year and we can go to the ballot you know if we if we need to go to the ballot with the curbside

ballot measure, i can't imagine who's going to vote no on it. so if we need to carve out charter authority well we you know and i think that's a conversation i don't want to imply it's a problem but i want to imply there's expertise at various agencies. right? so mta has expertise with setting up permit programs with curbside managing the curb. >> public works has expertise with excavation permits, encroachment permits. dubai has that expertise with the power and making sure that piece of this is working as needed. so you know, again, i don't want to imply that there's a problem but i want in a state that there's different expertise involved with the various elements of this. so we want to, you know, identify and work as a team and there is a great structure set up whereby mta public works

there's you know, an existing inter agency collaboration happening which is really great. so we're hoping to build off of the relationships and understand where there is room for streamlining the permitting where there's room to potentially delegate authority for various aspects of the permitting and if it's delegated to the mta of course we need to make sure we have that in-house expertise so that we we don't say hey, we can do it all in not have that expertise needed. >> so it's it is a team effort across city agencies do you have a timeframe within that which that conversation about permitting is going to be. >> well it's already started which is nice. we're not waiting for the pilot to end. we are, you know, kind of parallel play here and we're hoping to get something in place for 2026. the structure in place in the

coming months. i don't have a specific date at this point but you know, we're certainly happy to come back and provide an update but we do expect to have that with in 2026. >> what would it mean for the pilot to end because it sounds like we have something like 65 applications and we're anticipating two more going out in the next year. >> yeah, that pilot seems like it could go on for a very long well i think that's wrapping up so as those two additional sites are put in the ground then and what the team can correct me if i'm wrong that there we have selected that maximum number of participants three and once we finalize those sites and get those into the ground that is it for the pilot which is so for new participants. >> so the pilot is anticipating a total of how many chargers on the on the street it's electric will have has there are two installed currently urban ev is

proposing five sites in the dogpatch and volt post is proposing two sites or two chargers either in the sunset or treasure island so the pilot would be a total maximum of nine and then it sort of at some point between now and then sort of a different permitting process takes over. that's correct. okay. steam will take over. oh, okay. it looks like some of my colleagues have questions and comments. >> hey, thank you, president supervisor mahmood, you can ask some more questions to president mandell mean about the charter reform process. is it your understanding then that to create let me say a one stop shop for this permit we do need charter reform and you have a sense of which parts of the charter we need to change to make that possible. >> i'd have to take a look at that that is i'm not sure but so i guess more to come on that i don't have a specific you know ready ready to go answer

their cut it is there one concrete non charter related administrative change that you can make today that if you could do that today, which would you be to actually move this further along? >> well, there is something that is under discussion and that is a delegation of authority from public works to the mta on the encroachment permitting. so we are exploring that and that is an active conversation and so you know we can report back on that but we're not ready we don't have an outcome from that yet. >> of course we have to work through the city attorney and make sure that one it's allowable by what mechanism and then again making sure if it's delegated to mta that we have the in-house skills to do that to to issue those permits. >> and so thank you. >> thank you. supervisor supervisor chen

thank you, chair. >> you know i haven't seen a lot of public charges in district 11 so i think this is the equity questions to show 11 we use all modes of transportation and i know that in my district we do have some public parking space for example mission and norton street sites. so i just want to ask what is the city doing in selecting new sites to expand public facilities? well, you want to jump in. >> yes. so the city is assessing all of our city owned public parking garages in lots to determine power capacity and applying for funding to bring ev chargers into those lots that are managed by mta. in addition, through my role as ev ombudsperson i am in a support role for any ev service provider that's trying to bring charging to san francisco to

help them assess sites, troubleshoot permitting and talk to supervisors like you to see what demand is like in your district. so i'm excited to share. you know there has been some interest in bringing chargers to district 11 through ayana who's who's contemplating a large fast charging hub. but we want to also consider things like curbside or bringing charging to districts that don't have any through outside funding through state and federal funds. so our department has been successful in in doing that in bayview hunters point most recently this year and continue to apply to fund for funds so that if we're not seeing the market bringing funding to underserved areas the city can subsidize those chargers. >> thank you for that and yes, district 11 can use more

and other questions. it's personally i also have experiences in especially using chargers that is broke down so i want to also hear from you like what the protocol and procedures to ensure that existing stations which in my district is also very limited and you know that the station the existing ones are reliable and operation well yes the state has strong reliability standards for chargers and we followed suit. so for any chargers that are supported by funding through the city or kind of sponsored by the city, we're instituting the same requirements for the curbside program as part of the current emerging technology permit. we have reliability requirements and during the first initial two year term we'll evaluate each site, provide feedback so they can make any adjustments as needed and at the end of that term we

can evaluate and provide feedback on their status. so if they are not meeting our core requirements we will cancel their permit and have them pull out that charging infrastructure themselves. but of course we want to get ahead of it so we keep an open line of communication with any vendors that we work with and then also for charging projects that we're not a part of as a city. you know if folks come to me and have complaints about chargers being down or inoperable so i'm reaching out to those ev charging providers to find solutions as i think what's worse than not having charging in the ground is charging that's not working. so we're also working with other providers to get their equipment online and find out what's going on with those chargers that are always down. thank you so i have lots of questions sorry supervisor or i'm confused a little bit by the presentation that ms. delaney made so uh as to the

pilot program, what is exactly the relationship with a building owner? i didn't understand that. >> sure. so one of the reasons why it's been so difficult for legacy ev charging companies to deploy at the curb is because they're connecting directly to the utility and so that site selection process is determined by the interconnection process which can take up to 18 months. >> why the building i don't understand if this is a public curb, why the building has anything to do with it. >> well because they have power at the correct voltage and they have spare capacity in that building. so essentially we're just mimicking what happens if you live in the suburbs and you have a driveway or garage and you install your own at home charger your own level two charger it's the same amount of power that a dishwasher requires. so we pull that power.

>> yeah but that's assuming the curb belongs to the building and it does not the curb belongs to the public so yeah, there's actually there's two different processes that we're going into. there's the contract with the building to pull their power and then we're going through all of the processes with the environment department and sfm mta to pull the appropriate permits so the building doesn't own that curb that curb it's privately powered but it's a publicly accessible spot and who's paying for occupying that spot while that car is charging? so all of these parking spots are public parking. >> so you're saying it's free? well, you pay for the charging service but you're not paying for the parking area. okay. that clears it up. thank you. okay. so after all that presentation thank you so much. i am still like at a loss of who's in charge for like propelling this thing forward so in swedish that word on buds

person means go between i still i'm not sure who you're going between and who is leading the charge on this the s.f. mta is leading the charge. we are the lead agency. >> we will be the front door for the new permitting process and we will we are creating what that process will look like but it is intended to be a welcoming open front door for vendors so we will assess eligibility to participate in that permitting program and once and maybe we will issue the encroachment person permit depending on how our conversations go. but so empty is the front door and the other permits will still be required depending on how the charger will be set up. and so if your company a

and you make it through the welcoming front door with the clear expectations and the site mapping tool and we determine you are eligible all then you are eligible to go get the next permit on the list to complete the project and then once you've done that and you've gotten your permits you come back to the mta for that final check, right? so we're again as the lead agency we're going to check that vendor a has successfully received all of the permits needed and then we'll issue the final permit to operate. >> okay. i understand about the operationalizing of the permit processing. okay. so my question though is if if it's the mta that's going to be in charge, what is your goal for this program? >> what are the goals? our goal will be to establish those 100 charging locations

ends at the curbside by 2030. so that's my understanding of that is our goal and we're our goal is to then streamline in the process and have a clear, understandable, legible process for interested vendors. >> so in that i do feel some kind of way about that president because to me the goal should be much broader than that so it shouldn't be just issue 100 permits. so you know i was here during the pandemic when we rolled out the parklets you know that the shared spaces program and there was a very similar thing, you know to i mean we have to do it very quickly because we were in a pandemic but there were multiple goals. it wasn't just about issuing the permits. right? again, it there forgive me it just seems to me that there's multiple multiple goals here too and perhaps some goals that you are not even taking into account because you're the mta and not necessarily the puc or the department of the environment aside from that our

climate action goals and getting people to move towards if there's equity goals about who has access to these things that may or may not line up with the infrastructure that's already there. there are goals around you know, the use of these things that commercial spaces versus residential for example. there's the goal also of generating revenue. we do have vendors that right now use privately land for charging and they're making money off of that and we are giving away the curb for free. >> so you know, it seems to me that you know, the puc also has a goal of provide public power. they do so for our public buildings. i'm not sure why we wouldn't, you know, have them do it here for this public you know, although privatize for a tiny thing you know, activity, it

just seems to me that there are multiple goals and that, you know, we are looking at it in a very small way when we should be looking at it bigger. but that is just a comment, not a question. i do have one more question and that is who is making the decisions for site selection process? >> so aside from the map that you talked about i know again with experi of the shared spaces we talked about ada, we talked about fire accessibility like all of those things in addition to equity and you know what was needed. so who's making the site selection for the next 100? yeah, i will just say fair point and if i zoomed in too closely on the goal, i appreciate your point and to reorient us to the larger picture and there are those larger broader goals so i agree and yes and if there's a possessory interest about the

use of the curb then that's a conversation with tax and we're happy to have that conversation so oh sorry. treasurer tax collectors office the treasurer's office why is that you you guys part you pay for it like you charge for parking on commercial corridors. >> why would you give this away for free if there if there's not a meter on the spot i think you're talking about is the spot metered right. >> we're assuming that everything that's not metered is free, right? >> that's an assumption that you're making. right. but so we're trying to maintain it. >> the mta still has a responsibility to keep up that curb, to maintain it, to pave it to paint it. that's right. >> agreed. okay. so all of those all of that needs to be considered in and i guess i was just trying to address the point if there is a private company using the public right of way to make money then that is there is a mechanism under the possessory

interest under the treasurer's office to charge for that. so i just wanted to say we we are aware of that and will make sure that that's considered and the site selection is we are working to build out an interactive mapping tool but it will include those aspects that you mentioned and we have a very robust accessibility requirement that's built in and you know there's community readiness which is part of that conversation. >> so that is something that is under development. okay. >> thank you. it's kind of public comment. thank you. land use and transportation will now hear public comment related to agenda item number eight if you have public comment for this hearing please come forward to the lectern at this time. madam chair to preserve no speakers for agenda item number eight okay. >> public comment is now closed

. >> mr. president, what would you like us to do? >> well again thank thank you committee members for taking a little bit of time this afternoon for this conversation. i oh i feel frustrated. >> i'm happy that we have two more chargers on the ground now than we did two years ago. i also feel like this is a this is one of those conversations that seemingly goes on forever in san francisco and i think we were hoping that the feasibility study would sort of like set us up to really address kind of the things that we are now talking about addressing and move, you know, quickly to dramatically expand out the the network of curbside chargers and it feels like we're setting ourselves up for yet another rather long conversation where we spend where we have a lot of people in government talking to each

other about how to make something happen without showing the results for it that i think we all believe we want to see so i've had some conversations with as i said at least to time baptist about it. i think i'll have some more. i'm hoping that the resources and urgency around this will come not just from the board of supervisors but from the administration as well. i do think we can do more than two curbside chargers a year and i do think that the goal should be to get this, you know, rolled out sooner than 2030 and and thanks again to the mta for taking this on. some of the supervisors on this committee i believe are to be part of the charter conversation actually probably all the supervisors on the board are going to be part of the charger charter conversation and and so you know, to the extent that this requires charter changes, we want to know we want to know if this requires admin code changes.

we want to be partners in helping move things along but we also want to deliver quickly and not be using our you know, our staff time and resources on projects that don't and with good results. so i would like to have this hearing continued to the call the chair and i'd like to bring us back and say three months and i hope some of the thinking at mta around permitting will have moved forward and maybe we'll be able to hear a little bit more about progress on the pilots. but you know, i think this is sort of a check in and and i'm hoping we'll have more good news in the spring. okay. i don't think i close public comment today. public comment is now closed. i would first want to say thank you, president edelman for this stick to itiveness because you've been talking about for

as long as i've known you. >> so i'm really glad and yeah, i hope that we can make some progress on things that it makes sense. i mean especially for my district which is a little more suburban where we could really use this for sure that would be really great. okay so i would like to make a motion that we continue this item to the call of the chair a motion offered by the chair this hearing be continued to the call the chair vice chair chen chen i'm mohamad mahmood i chair melgar i malka i mean i'm sure there are three eyes okay that motion passes. >> thank you. thank you. >> let's go to item number nine please. agenda item number nine is a motion approving final map number ten 857 for a 20 commercial unit condominium project located at 1301 to 1341 evans avenue being a subdivision of assessor's parcel block number 5237 lot number zero 37 and adopting findings pursuant to the

general plan in the higher priority eight priority policies and planning code section one a 1.1 this motion is on today's agenda as a potential committee report it may be sent for consideration by the board at their meeting tomorrow december 9th, 2025. >> okay. thank you. we have a presenter here from the surveyor's office, mr. elias french. hi. welcome. thank you. nice to meet you all. i'm here on behalf of public works department of the city in subdivisions and mapping office of the city and county surveyor. i'm the city and county surveyor having started fairly recently. thank you for inviting me this map here before us is a 20 unit commercial condominium

subdivision map. it was received by our office in 2021 duly circulated to city agencies and they responded with their feedback and comments which are very minimal. the applicant completed the required conditions. i believe the only condition required of this commercial condominium subdivision is a conversion of existing commercial space. to be clear was to get a building inspection which they did and perform any required building code update work and then they proceeded to final mapping. so we issued tentative approval, they completed the required conditions and then submitted the final map to our office. so we reviewed all of that approve the final map and i signed it and then we forwarded along to board of supervisors

as is customary for all subdivisions of five lots or units or more. that's a summary of the project that is 1301 evans street. it's an existing two story 20 unit commercial building on evans street and they're converting the existing units into commercial condominiums. it sounds good. thank you so much. you're welcome, sir. french mr. clerk, i don't see anyone on the roster with comments. why don't we go to public comment on this item? >> land use and transportation will now hear public comment related to agenda item number nine does anyone have public comment for agenda item nine? madam chair appears in those speakers. okay. >> public comment is now closed mr. clerk i would like to make a motion to send this item out of committee with a positive recommendation as a committee report a motion by the chair that this motion be recommended

as a committee report. vice chair chin chin i member mahmood mahmood i chair melgar i malka. madam chair, there are three eyes that motion passes. >> thank you mr. clerk do we have any other items on our agenda? >> there is no further business. we are adjourned. >> thank youculture. >> well to c h f a the society of america here on a chinatown the district preserved and the

history of chinatown with any person of any background is sketch plan or accepted for all people the founder help to create the studies and with a major collection on the objects that tell the material history of chinatown and so much is offend in chinatown incredible all the texture of the design a way to get from the east to the west and beyond that have an amazing institution like c h f a to . >> san francisco stands together. we stand with our immigrant

community. if you need legal support or to report a potential ice action, please call the rapid response network at 415200154a. we will get through this together. check on your neighbors. see if you can help deliver groceries. walk children to school. support each other. join protests with creativity and peace. stay safe.

>> welcome everyone. thank you so much for joining me today. the round table discussion. i actually have background in youth work. worked in china town before so having you four from youth commission join today is very interesting to hear your thoughts and concerns and what you are talking about from the youth commission and your generation your thoughts. let's get into it. start with introductions. your name. grade rkts school. and what lead you to become into the youth commission? could start with emily. >> so, my name is

emily, she her pronouns. (inaudible) in san francisco. and i joined the youth commission because growing up i relied on public transportation and a lot of community organizations such as (inaudible) and through these organizations they introduced me to a lot of community organizing movements happening and that is when i learned of the youth commission because my friend was also on it at the time and i was interested because i saw a benefited from a lot of public service in san francisco and wanted to insure all youth in san francisco could have opportunities to benefit from these services as well and these services would be available to everyone. that's when i applied to the youth commission and i joined and that's where i got to learn so much about like how local government works and how i could contribute my voice to make better opportunities for all youth in san francisco. >> nice. how long have you been on the youth commission? >> i joined in 20 21

and this is my second term. >> normally the youth commission, what's the age range? >> youth ages 12-23. >> wow! you can be out of high school and on the commission? >> yeah. we have college students and we used to have middle school students on the youth commission too but now they are a freshman in high school. >> nice. awesome. >> (inaudible) >> ewen a senior at san francisco high school. i joined the youth commission. i had beener interested in san francisco politics freshman in high school and volunteered on local political campaign and district attorney election and got into that process, and from there did more campaigning and got into youth advocacy and activism in the city. and from there i sort have (inaudible) city hall on certain issues and wanted to be on the flip side and see what i could do in city hall for young people and a voice for young people

and are the youth commission was the perfect opportunity for that so why i decided to apply. thankfully i was appointed. >> great. how many years have you been on? >> second term as well so beginning september 2021. >> every turm is one year? >> yeah, because people age out so quickly and people go away for college so we try to make it like a school year roughly. >> okay. nice. thank you. >> hi. i'm hayden. i'm a junior this year at (inaudible) my first term on the commission but what drew me to it is like emily i have always been super fascinated by public transportation. since i was two years old i had a baby sitter and she couldn't get a driver license so would take the bus everywhere and it was fascinating to see all

the people and places i could go around the city and just as i got older i would explore more and more but realized that you know, like, it is not as simple as buses driving around and i can be involved in getting more buses out there, having more places to go to and like i think especially when the pandemic happened and all government meetings moved on line it was a lot more accessible for me so i was able to pgo and make public comment and see had all the presentations, see all the people on commissions and stuff and also had several friends who had been on the youth commission in the past so i just saw it as a great opportunity for me to advocate for young people, because i feel we have a lot of needs and sometimes it isn't always represented. >> thank you. >> hi, i'm yoselin. a senior at urban school of san francisco. this is my first term in the youth

commission. similar to everyone else said, i have been interested in politics and public policy and how legislation is made. i are worked for someone who worked with supervisor ronan, he really-i was fascinated with what he gets to do in his job and the issues he gets to work on and people he gets to speak. this is a great opportunity to test what you are interested in and so i applied and got in and very happy. >> how many total in the youth commission? one per district? >> yes, one per district and 5 from the mayor. >> there is 11 supervisor ones and 6 from mayor office, 5 of it which are specifically for minority community representation and one is appointee so 17 total. >> 17. great.

>> (inaudible) one of the bigger commissions in the city, but because youth is everyone at some point in life, every community has youth, it is important to have enough seats to have a voice for communities and their different needs on the youth commission. >> for sure. let's get into the nitty-gritty of it. i really interested to hear some of the concerns that either the youth commission is talking about now or even you yourselves personally what concerns are you trying to like advocate for and stuff like that? who would like to start? >> i guess i can start. before joining the youth commission i'm involved in housing and mass incarceration crimial justice system. i knew these were topics i wanted to discuss and bring up so i'm also on individual committees so two main topics is youth incarceration and substance abuse and gun violence

and-yeah. those are the main issues we are talking about. >> for youth incarceration, what are some of the topics? is it more about the resources putting or not putting into it or is it- >> yeah. one main thing now is talking about juvenile justice center. forget the street. and, i think woodside and por tolla. >> it was supposed to be closed last year and has not because there is a lot of uncertainty about what is supposed to happen. i recently spoke to chief miller the probation officer at the center, so discussing ways we can support them to get that closed and have more equitable resources for the youth who are currently inside still and relying on community members and families and friends instead of like abusive and harmful police officers and the

justice system. >> is sthr racial disparities in the youth incarceration? >> yeah. what i heard from the meeting there is currently like 14 youth inside. they range in age but it is all like people of color and people from low income families who are usually the ones more involved in the crimial justice system. >> i read somewhere that like perhaps there could be more money put into the communities to help low income or kids being not targeted but don't have as much opportunities and end up in those places. >> yeah. >> versus putting money in- >> i think it is better to fund organizations and programs. i think emily you mentioned you are in break through, i'm in the smart program

help afford education and help get to college and teach them and offer activities so they have more resources and opportunities for their future. just like putting more money into programs activities and things that like shift youth experiences to a more positive one. >> any other concern? >> i can add on. i think you all said investing in youth early is really important rather then focus on punishment. i think that goes unsaid. break through helped so much in the education. if not for breakthrough and summer program jz tutorer and mentorship they offered which my parents couldn't offer me i don't know where i would be. i think community organizations like break through and after school programs funded by the city are so important supporting youth early

and insure they dont go down the wrong pact. coming from under resourced neighborhoods and first generation it was very hard to carve my own path so finding mentorship in organizations like this is important and crucial to my personal development. >> i say the science behind it too backs up the testimony. violence-i do a lot of work in gun violence prevention and programs are often more successful then police are in preventing gun violence in our city. obviously both are a part of the equation, but i think that we have seen a lot of investment. we have seen them be quise successful and i know i am and think everyone on the commission is interested in looking how to support those programs and have them work specifically with youth as well and get young people into the program early before

they have a opportunity to be put into these situations that cause violence to occur. >> yeah. >> i just say also like the education system plays a big part because it is great we have a lot of community organizations, but sometimes it can't always be the most accessible so one thing we are working on is expanding outreach and access so people know about these problems and also within our education system i was looking at data in regards to suspensions and expelgz and similar to juvenile justice center it is overwhelmingly student of color and lower income students effected by that as well as students who are often miss school and there is a lot of reasons for that. some relate to transportation and such. it is just been exacerbated by

have distance learning. not everybody had the same access to technology and such to stay connected and engaged in their education during that time. >> i'll add on, i feel when people think about issues like youth not attending school or not doing homework or committing these petty crimes, there is often a moralization and everyone is like they are just bad people. they have the wrong intentions, they are messing up the city, but i think it is just generally very important to investigate the root causes. a lot of these kids come from under resourced naerbd s and have-for a lot of people it is means of survival so so important to look beyond the surface and no there is no need to moralize these situations. these kids don't have other solutions so it is important to look at the root cause and see how to address prevention rather then punishment and suspension and removal from school. >> it is funny talking about resources and schools. i'm often surprised how

many good community organizations are like i don't know how to reach young people and i'm like have you been going to schools, the place where young people all have to pgo during the day? i think i also feel schools dont realize that they have the opportunity to provide resources to young people. they are allowed to connect with outside resources and bring them in and use them as well. that is something i'm hoping to encourage on the youth commission as well. >> right. usually it is outside -i dont want to say non profit but the-schools themselves are [multiple speakers] >> teachers have become social workers for young people. >> which is why prop g is such a great proposition. i think it is $60 million. increases over time but $60 million goes to public schools for

activities, classes, nurses, therapist to support students, which is great. which is what we need. >> yeah. just add on to that or the question, because i know high schools have counselors and probably i don't know if mental health specialists, but do middle schools and elementary schools in the city have that? >> i think it depends on the institution. i am very fortunate to go to private middle school and high school. i did go to public elementary school and there is a huge gap in education and resources available in public and private. i can't speak to that now. >> it has been a huge burden. recently both our school nurse and our school wellness coordinator left and there was an iligez to the fact it was connected to the pay roll issues occurring with sfusd and not just that but they

are already paid much less then other public school districts private school districts, like for nurses if they were to work somewhere else so it is really hard to attract people to work in these schools and we don't budget enough positions in the first place. now we have 7 school counselors for like a body of 3,000 kids and you can think of the kids that have questions about college and classes to take to graduate. it is just not enough resources in the schools. i went to sfusd middle school and we had one counselor for each grade level, but it just really isn't enough and a lot of schools-it kind of-there is pto or lowel-able to fund a second librarian or nurse the full week opposed to 2 and

a half days so if you get injured monday, you got a nurse, but tuesday you are out of luck. that's something happening in the schools and i just feel that is crazy because they don't have a affluent enough pta to fund the nurse. that should be basic. we shouldn't have to ask for donations to fund a school nurse. >> that ties into the mental health issues people are facing. covid was detrimental to everyone but especially young people who spnt hours a day online and away from mental health support in a really difficult time and i think people are beginning to realize now how important those services are. i think there is work to do but advocase hads been relatively successful in san francisco getting more support for mental health but there is a huge gap we are now catching up with. it was never priority before the pandemic

and beginning to become one now but there are so many young people struggling and waiting for support and frankly often falling through the cracks of the system that is supposed to help them. >> yeah. speaking from an older person, no mental helt what so ever in anything growing up so to talk in the progress is like huge, but of course it isn't enough still. >> there is also stigma depending on your race and religion whether mental health is a real thing. >> and also what your mental health condition is too. >> right. >> i think mental health issues always existed but the pandemic brought to light all the really bad things happening. not exacerbated i feel no one was talking about mental health before the pandemic and i think often times like you said, a lot of the services are not

offered in school so i think in general there is a wide disconnect from students and services, whether that is service in schools or community organizations. all these services exist but students don't know how to access them so there needs to be a better way to connect students to everything that can support them. >> another concern possibly-you brought up gun violence, is that another concern you all have? >> just i think just yesterday the new york times posted a story about how it is officially over-taken any other cause for deaths for young people in the united states . >> 19 percent. >> it used to be car deaths and now number one is gun violence. >> gun violence. also the racial disparities there are incredible too. and concerning. i do a lot of work on gun violence prevention. of course there is need

for federal action. we are not go toog solve the gun violence crisis until we see senate and house pass safety legislation that prevents gun getting in the hands of dangerous people but there are actions on the local and state level. eve enin california even in liberal san francisco that can help save lives, particularly around things like safe storage of guns. i wrote a resolution on the commission urging all san francisco schools to send home safe storage information and just recently a stay law passed that require schools to send home safe storage information for firearms. violence intervention programs are incredibly important to help end this crisis: building the community relations. and also mental health is a big part. access to a gun increases-i dont know what the statistic is off the top of my head, but gun

(inaudible) in killing the person then any other form of suicide and it is so irreversible. that access to guns can exacerbate the issues too and someone who might be struggling today and tomorrow but in two years from now would be in a much better place with support and medication they need there is a irreversebal thing they can do with a gun then they can in other ways of hurting themselves. >> is it the norm to have drills at school? >> yeah. it is scary having to like go through that process. >> the data actually-it is unclear but also pretty clear that having these drills doesn't actually save lives. we now in the united states have enough data points of school shootings in schools that have lock down drills and that don't have lock down drills that frankly doesn't make much a difference. there are other policies and

things we could work on that are less traumatizing to kids as well that would be better use of time and resources then lock down trills. not advocating against them, but i think that isn't where our focus should necessarily be. >> haven't done it this year. it is interesting because i just think our school campus we have so many kids and people wander on and off. i are try not to think about it, but it is a thought in my head, anybody can wander on to here. >> i think it is crazy. ever since sandy hook i literally started doing lock down drills in third grade before i even started sex ed. i think growing up and having to do that every year was really traumatizing. this could happen to me any day

so it is scary and seeing gun violence get worse as i grow up not even an adult it is terrifying. >> too many times i walked out of school and checked my phone and see a story of kids like me in a classroom like me all day being shot and killed in the classroom. it is astonish to walk of the last class of the day and check the news and see that whether it is in michigan and texas and here in california, relatively random it was that school. it very much could have been your school. that is something we can't-there is a feeling of helplessness around that too i think. >> there was the story about the kid campaigning for (inaudible) he got shot. >> 13 year old i believe. >> campaigning for warnack. i have been the kid in freshman year volunteering on a

local political campaign and lots of people dont like campaigns. that is reasonable, i get it. having a gun in the situation made that 10 times worse. >> right. yeah. >> i was like not knocking on doors just like walking up and hanging door fliers this election and in the back of my head, i thought about what if somebody like thinks i'm stealing a package or break into their house? >> (inaudible) >> especially i feel in some more afffluent neighborhoods i see next door, they are like this teenager is walking up to my door and must be up to no good. it was a thought in my head. i was like dang, maybe it isn't a gun, maybe it is a dog or they have something on me. >> this is not-i think people think we are in san francisco, we don't have the issue as

much. especially in poor communities and communities of color, this is a consistent issue that we are still facing and a lot has to do with the fact san francisco policies don't cover parts of the state and country as well. san francisco lead the way with the ghost gun ban. ghost guns are guns you can buy online and put together yourself that don't require a serial number which gets rid of any system of keeping track of guns we have in the country, and we were the first city to actually make that illegal and in california fallowed through with that as well. selling of that was illegal. it is things like that, all these ways gun manufacturers and gun industry is going around the policies that we put in place that is continuing the issue. especially with the gun violence we see on the e streets every day. there are school shootings acrauz the

country and many more kids shot walking home because they live in a community of color that had this consistent issue. it is an astonishing thing and it uniquely american issue as well. >> i guess as the youth commission, what actually do you feel you could bring up or advice-because obviously there are many topics that have a lot of issues, but the gun violence just hits home i everyone, especially for me and everything. as a youth commission, how do you go about that? >> well, i don't know much about the ghost gun ban but our job is advice the mayor and board of supervisors on issues related to youth. we can't solve the issue of gun violence in a night, two nights but i think what we can do is urge local policy makers to take action and i think by

the local government taking action we can inspire the state government, inspire the federal government and that is how change works so i think everything we can do to inspire our local elected officials to take action on things like the ghost gun ban can inspire more counties and states and just the world in general. >> we can bring up any topic. any issue to the board of superrisers and the mayor and whether they take our recommendation or not, we can still push them and urge them to do something about it, so they can't ignore us, they have to realize this is what the youth are writing about and what they like us to do, we have to do something. >> it is fun because the youth commission in san francisco and relatively unique to san francisco as well. it is part of our city charter so they legally can't ignore us. they don't have to take our recommendations [multiple speakers] they have to read the resolutions and talk about the issues and think most people in

san francisco are open to work wg the youth commission. there is power behind that and that is where a lot of advocacy work we do gets its power. >> also, there is many board of supervisors care about us and care about the work that we are bringing up, so it isn't like they are just not reading our-or caring. they actually do care about the issues and read them and consider them. >> it is really unique, because a lot of supervisors just like reach out to us and are like hey, what do you feel about bike parking and they care about what you say. >> they offer resources or do you want to speak to this person or let me introduce you to this organization. they really do want to help us continue our work and really expand what we know. >> the mayor recognizes me places now. that is how you

know you are making a im pact, that is that kid. her office is very open to work wg the youth commission as well and i appreciate-i don't think i can think of a supervisor or mayor office that isn't open to us and listening to our concerns. >> it isn't like they just want to take our feedback for their benefit, they want to help you grow as a person. multiple offices offered me internships and different opportunities to be in this ad or help write this legislation or be in the video and that is unique because they want to see you grow as a person and follow all your dreams. literally the senator was asking what college i wanted to go to and if they could help in any way so very sweet. >> sometimes i look at the youth commission and like, these people are going to be on the board of supervisors in 20 years. this is good we are learning now and doing this now, because we are

the next generation of leaders of the city. i really do believe that. of the country. >> any other concerns? >> i think big issue we are also thinking about is young people and it is kind of upon us in some ways but climate change. there is talk recently about the great highway and we will have to close a portion of it in 2025 because it is literally crumbleing into the ocean. this is real and here now. there is a lot of the city is very ambitious when it comes to setting vision and policies. we have vision zero that in two years i think at this point we want to eliminate all traffic fatalities of people walking across the street, get hit by a car and essentially made no progress since it started. we want 20percent of trips in the city people making them by bicycle and we are just not making any

progress on all these goals we set out in terms of climate change so it can be frustrating but that motivates me. we set what our values are and how we make sure our policies and decisions we make day to day, make sure those align with what we are actually saying that we value. >> and that's replicated across so many issues of san francisco. we love to be this progressive icon but sometimes when you get down to the nitty-gritty we are not making the progress on issues we need. we are not setting the transformative policies that need to be done. transit is a great example with vision zero. >> i agree. i think the city can be very performative and also like-it is like they say they want one thing but they completely do something else and that just gets by-pass and don't think that is okay.

also, i think specifically with climate change and transportation, there are so many neighborhood disparities people dont talk about like under resourced communities experience the climate change a lot worse then other communities and growing up in the bayview and excelsior and living near freeways and experiencing pollution and not able to bike in my neighborhood in fear of a car crash because of the narrow streets t is really horrible. we can't fix the issue in the weltier communities how do we help the under served communities that experience the brunt of it? i also think people are so resistant to change. especially with the slow streets program which we have been looking into as a committee on the youth commission. the housing recreation and transit committee. we (inaudible) benefited youth in the city specifically overall, but still the mayor and other elected officials are resistant to it and afraid of change because we are such a car dominated city

and think it is important to be optimistic about the future and be realistic but also like slow streets are helpful. this can actually get to where we want to go in terms of the climate goals and people need to consider that. >> it is kind of like in a sense feel a chicken and egg problem because before i used to be somebody that is mad like i don't understand why are people stuck in their cars but i feel a lot of issue, that is the system. we set up a system that if it will take me a hour to take the bus across town or i will be all most hit by a car biking down a 40 mile per hour road, the obvious choice is to drive. that is the system we set up so it is hard to convince people that we know this is system and understand why you drive. we are not saying you are a bad person because you drive because there i think there are people out there who are like you are a horrible person because you drive a car and you are killing all the turtles and

the children. that's the system we have, so we need to show people that there is a better way and we can get there and it will take a lot of time and there will be inconvenience but in the long run, if we sit and never change it isn't going to work. there has to be a little bit of inconvenience change, people will feel uncomfortable but if we stay stagnant it isn't going to work. >> i think that's something that the youth commission has been pretty big on making people uncomfortable. elected officials [multiple speakers] i think specifically with free muni for all youth which the youth commission helped create. of course the sfmta was super uncomfortable and like how will we pay for transit for all youth. youth cant afford fares or drive how do you

spect them to pay to get to school and their job and since we proposed it we have seen so many positive im pacts. youth and hop and ride for free. they have access to so many opportunities and i think that is so important. making people uncomfurtable and showing change is good and being resisant to change is unhethy. it makes us go in the wrong direction so making people uncomfortable and doing our job to hold them accountable creates positive im pact for the youth in the city. >> i think we make each other uncomfortable too. >> you mean ear each other? >> i remember-we do a retreat before we begin every year to see where people's priorities are and meet each other and we had intentional uncomfortable conversations recognizing the privilege people hold, recognizing the backgrounds people have and how that impact s how they view the world as well. and think that is

important and often missing from the conversations we have in the city. i often see two different groups about housing is the ultimate issue. people on one side saying we have issues of not approving and building more housing and people on the other side saying i'm concerned my neighborhood will get gent riifyed and lack of dialogue and be uncomfortable stops the progress. we have so many unnecessary divides in the city especially in politics are the reason the issues are not being addressed. people in san francisco agree on the solution. we want to see less homelessness, less crime on the street, we want to see more people getting the services they need and more people getting stable housing, but because we are not willing to sit down with each other and made the strong divisions and

so resistant to changing and changing our opinion as well i think that is a reason we are seeing so many san franciscans especially within the last couple elections have expressed this we keep voting on the issues. every politician promises to solve the problem in their own way but it is never getting solved. >> we also see people moving out of san francisco because we can't fix the problems. and those cities are being also like having more housing problems as well. >> to add on, i think from not even two years i have been involved in san francisco politics i see so many patterns. the same prop every year and named a different prop. there is no change. that is why it is important to sit together and have conversation like this and i think that is why being involved in politics as youth has been such an enlighting experience. i it is

uncomfortable but i think discomfort brings positive changeism i find arguing with other youth commissionsers. i realize blind sfauts and where i can im prove by listening to other people and think why youth involvement in politics is important because you are exposed to different perspective and your own perspective and it-you are like why do i think like that and have this opinion? that is a way i have grown on the youth commission, being involved in the really intense discourse in san francisco and try to find myo perspective and being introspective with myself and other people. >> people are often ask me why are more young people not involved in san francisco politics ? there are a lot of people doing activism and organizing, young people in san francisco, but because when we

have these conversations we try to put people into these groups like moderate and progressive and that isn't how issues work and that is such a toxic environment particularly fl young person who is also still trying to learn as well. i think i felt that on the youth commission. not between ourselves but outside the youth committee being put into a box and i am like i dont know where i lie. a big part of the youth commission is learning about the issues. i don't come on the youth commission with a opinion on every issue. i had to do research and talk to people and hear different opinions in order to determine how i felt about something. we often don't give people the space to do that. >> i think in san francisco politics there is a need to put labels on people and especially i see with the whole board of ed stuff with the low admission policy, i remember i

was in a internship and they reallyb expected me to have opinions right away about how i felt about issues. i'm a ayouth and learning how to have my own perspect and engage. i think with the low admission there is a thing like if you believe we should do lottery emission then you are progressive but if not you are moderate. i think the labeling is bad because confining people in a box makes you question-that's not healthy discourse. you are labeling them. that is toxic. >> and there are only two options. we can do- >> politics isn't multiple choice. >> i think the low admission system is problematic but doesn't mean i want to get rid of it entirely. there is middle ground and im provements that could be made and we dont allow for that. >> do you guys feel as

youth especially with climate change i guess, but is a lot of pressure as youth to-not that you solve it but it is your problem? do you feel more pressure? >> of course. i feel there is a problem with putting all the pressure on people instead of company who are the most responsible for toxic air emissions and things like that. telling us to stop using plastic straws but the big companies use plastic bags and plastic containers. there is a definitely pressure on youth to fix the problem because the older people are like we will not by in the world much longer, so why do we have to fix anything? >> crazy how connected every issue is. i was in richmond the ort day which is very under served community and they center the big

chevron refinely and smoke in the air and with the free way is by. i think everything is so connected and we need to do so much. when we talk earlier about people getting to school, transportation is a big part and free muni. everything is interconnected. it is crazy. it is like hard sometimes to-i know this is a issue we need to do something about it but it is hard to really-you do need to figure out the root cause of everything and-but i think what yoselin said is true. it is hard to like when there is a drought and they tell me shave a minute off my shower, i'm like okay, but there are all these people growing live stock and agriculture using millions tons more water. in some ways i understand there is a personal aspect to it, but we

need more big policy changes. i can't solve this alone and think that is something the commission shows is really like-i didn't come into this work as a part of any big groups or organizations, i was just kind of like doing my own thing and then like kind of like when the pandemic happened there was kind of like this like coalition of people came together to like save muni service and that is when i thought we were getting results and i'm like, this has to be something we all like come together and work on. i think young people actually like realize that and that's one of the great things is we see this is like a horrible thing, but in some ways unifys us. we all have to deal with this problem so we need to work with each other and move past any labeling of i don't like this person because they are a moderate and i'm a progressive. it is kind of uniting in a

weird way. >> to add to hayden's point, that is why individualism is a big problem in the capital ist society because everyone is like you can do this by yourself and be successful and solve the world problem but since i joined the youth commission i have been introduced to people power. we are so much more power when we are collective and work together and think about the system rather then our own self-and the youth system taught me to think beyond myself and the world in general. that is something so unique i never found in any other institution. that is why people should teach kids in school. they should teach them to graduate, make as much money as possible, do whatever you want, buy the biggest house, a mansion, make a family. they should teach kids to feel responsible for the world and im pact they make on the world and that is what the youth commission taught me and it has been the most meaningful life lessen i learned. >> it is funny how

often an adult will come up to me or in the youth commission in general and say i'm so glad you are the future. you will solve our problems. you will be part of the solution. these people work in city government too. your job is to solve the issues. i'm part of the solution too, but you can't just give that to our generation. that is expectation we feel the im pact of climate change so therefore we need to solve it. we can't solve gun violence until young people demand it from the state legislators. you need to be part of the solution too. we need to bridge the gap between youth and adults as well. a big thing i believe in is coalition building across divides. there are things that yoselin and i don't don't agree on and with vote against each other. at the same time we need to work hand in hand to

solve the issues we do. and like hayden was saying, there is a thing i dont want to work with this person because we disagree on this issue. >> you need that. >> you can disagree on the issue and also agree on this issue and need to work together to get it done. >> i think that is another thing with teaching youth these things in schools. these are really important life skills. leadership is important life skill. collaboration across divides is important life skill and taught me so much as a person being able to debate with all these different people. me and you argue a lot, but- >> we are great friends by the way. >> we are really great friends but have been able to do meaningful things together and that is something we should include in the education system challenging youth to think beyond their own perspective and work with people they disagree with and i think leadership opportunities like that should be provided all across the city so we can cultivate the next generation of leaders that will change the world.

>> there is this term that being used a lot by the younger generation. it is funny for sure, and but i want to ask what does okay boomer, that term, what does that mean? what is the meaning? obviously i don't know if you can explain where it came from, but what does it mean and really mean i guess, if there is a real meaning to it. anybody want to explain what okay boomer is? >> kind of a millennial thing i think. >> i don't know. i'm somebody who is on twitter and see it a lot there. it is like- >> any social media platform you see it. >> it is something that we'll say in response to-sometimes there is a lot of we do face people or adults who they might straight up disagree with us, but they might be people who they say they agree and say i really want to help you and do

the opposite. they don't really put their money where their mouth is so to speak, so it is like calling them out like okay--i think it is kind of like seeing sometimes people say look at you, you guys are all entitled or the lazy generation or whatever and they see us as being rude to them by saying okay boomer, but the realty is, it is kind-they dont value us. i don't get respect from you so why am i going to go and support whatever you want or agree with whatever you say? i feel like-there is this weird twisted power structure. they always tell you respect your elders but you don't respect me, so-- >> there is a huge gap between adults and youth now a days. they like don't like care about our ideas or think you are still too young. we

had more life experiences. we have been in school longer and seen more so you don't understand and can't speak about this. that might be maybe true but also our opinions matter and we have been through things and seen things and you should like care about our opinions as well. okay, boomer. >> interesting, it is a funny neme but speaks to the issue of how much space our different generations taking up in the conversation and gen z is willing to demand space then others and political movements. >> gen-z is-late 90 to early 2010? >> yeah are. i think everyone on the youth commission now is gen z. >> gen z has stereo type of, never experienced no

internet. >> addicted to technology. very loud. >> yeah. they also say a social justice warrior. >> yeah. [laughter] >> some of the stereo types. >> the best thing gen z when needed we come together and unit and fight for what we need and want. >> just fed up. i think there is a push within our generation to be like guys, this is so dumb. adults arguing over the issues, 40, 50 years and so over it and need to move on and solve the issues instead of talk about them and think that is true on the local state and national level and globally. >> i was just going to say, i feel like the term okay boomer is a justification for the massive divides that exist between our generations and we have seen that because

there are so many technology advancements happening so it is created wide divides between us and the generation before us but i don't think using the term is a okay to justify that. we don't have to work with these people. we do have to work with these people to achieve meaningful change. these people make the decisions that effect our every day lives and if they don't have perspective how we are im pacted no change will get made and i think that is quhie why the youth commission is so important because the mayor district supervisors, they make decisions on everything that effect our lives so why it is important to have a voice in city hall because they need to work for us to create better outcomes for all youth in san francisco. >> i think it is important to recognize there is a lot we have to learn as well. i think part of okay boomer can be dismissive of generational knowledge that we need to get as well. i think it is possible to both demand change from a generation and

learn lessens from them at the same time. >> right. >> has anyone said it? >> i never used it. >> we use it as a joke. >> we use it against each other. i don't think i have been told a person okay boomer. >> i thought it in my head. i feel a lot of times there is a like thing where like it is like a form of like gas lighting. we have a personal experience and like that's my experience and i'll share that with people and the first thing they tell me is stats dont support that. my experience doesn't support that. that shouldn't have happened and try to dismiss me. my personal experience can't possibly be valid because they have done research that may or may not be valid. maybe their research didn't include youth so there is no way the research included my perspective. they will invalidate me. i don't say to them. i don't want to be super rude but i'm like

uh-huh, uh-huh. sure. that is what you think. >> i think also for like career expectations one thing i love about the youth and younger people is that we dont let companies--how do i say this (inaudible) we have more salary expectations. that is sometimes companies give you the low ball and people are like, no, we want transparns and want to get paid what we need to get paid because minimum wage living and you can't afford to live in a city with hundred thousand dollars you need to live well, so i think that for careers it is also which career will give us the most money to survive in this world. which is tech comes in and stem. >> interesting too, there is-very tabu to share your

salary but becoming encouraged. i would feel very comfortable-i don't make a salary but post college i think it is important especially as a white male to share the information with others to be aware of disparities and rectify them as well. that might be a generational thing too. i feel it was taboo to talk about your economic situation. we complain a lot about it. we also grow up in a time of incredible inflation. literally everything is so expensive and my parents are like how does it cost $5 for a cup of coffee? i'm like let me tell you about books in college. >> everything is expensive. >> it is weird, i work for the city in a job outside of this and like, i don't know, i just like think it is like cool because it just list the salary when you apply i looked at other jobs and like wait that isn't the standard

they don't tell you how much you get paid? somebody was telling me about buying a car and the weirdest thing in our society we are like go to the car dealership and it isn't the price, it is quhoo is the best negotiator. it is a weird thing. i just want simple. i want to walk in and know how much i pay. >> i think i feel aware of the value of my work. especially doing this work as well which is demanding and hard and unpaid because of just how the city is set up. i love it. knowing the value of the skills you have and being willing to say that's not a high enough salary for me. i need to live off--especially if you have a degree. that's just not what i'm worth and think people in gen z are willing to be aware how the system is

taking advantage of people and like low balling them basically and much more willing to stand up to that and because i think there is also this personal dynamic where it is like if i was talking to a employer i would be much more willing to say i know you are not low balling me intentionally. like what you said. [laughter] but the system is. >> to add on r i love the youth commission. i love the work we do and it is a really fulfilling job and i would love to find a job like this some time after i graduate college. >> i see myself being a staff member. >> it is also a privilege to be able to know what you want to do and to be able to pursue that because if i wanted to do writing or something because i reading and writing, i probably would want be able to do that because i'm first generation, parents are immigrants and don't make that much money and don't have the line of

generational wealth t. is a privilege to do your job and what you love and public service is pretty well pay-it is privilege and think being able to consider that and having privilege to do something like this and having the time right now i'm really grateful for that but not everyone can do that because they don't have time and have to consider salary more then we do. now we are just checking on-is this going to make me enough so i can go shopping but these are really important jobs people rely on their lives for. >> we talked about-is there a stigma about youth in politics and- >> for sure. >> do you feel it or do you feel it at all? >> i feel there is little like-i dont know if micro aggression is the right term. i got a permit to use the bike room from city hall and i filled out the form and the lady was looking at me and was like, you work here? i'm like yeah, i don't have a

city e-mail address but can i write my employee id number. she is like, you have those, that is cute. she wouldn't talk to an adult like that. she wouldn't say you have employee id that is cute. i was like wow, in that moment. i don't want to tell too many stories. >> sometimes they don't take you seriously because you are a young person. >> i remember walking into supervisors office, we were inviting-legislative aids and a couple times they are like, hello. they are like, why are you here? i'm like this is a public office so everyone can walk into and second of all, we are commissioners. that is the reason we are here. >> i have been called cute so many timeatize is unbelievable. i'm like man, i'm just trying to do my job. i remember there was a interesting debate i had with this guy. we were doing a

trash cleanup and it was me and this other dude talking about this book we read about youth involvement in politics. i said i don't think youth should be involved in government because they will be sad and disallusioned how much the government can't do. i'm like-i tried my best to argue with him very respectfully but that is such a bad take because i think youth should be taught to be optimistic rather then pessimistic where we can go in the future but a lot of adults think otherwise. a lot of adults believe the same things he believes. they think youth should just do their little thing, go to school, have fun- >> if you are not creating change why are you there? for the money? >> there is also issue the youth commissioners felt of tokenization and being like a

politician with-photo op- [multiple speakers] look at the youth leader i'm promoting and are they leave and there is no mentorship. there is big difference between mentorship and tokenization. i think we do a relatively good job in city hall. i think most people care about us and (inaudible) but there are times too where i'm like from people who i think of as people who are mentors who are like you just want me here to stand next to you for a photo opand don't think i'm will ing to do that without having a conversation with you about this issue. >> you can tell when meeting someone or being at an event when they are just like using you versus if they actually care what you have to say. >> i think as a youth commissioner, it is so important to find the balance between being used for tokenization but also using that

clout. you should take advantage of it. >> you are standing next to the elected official. >> it gives the youth commission more prominence and if it helps us do our job mine as well. it is important to find balance and make sure you are not taken advantage of. >> something else that is interesting is-i feel like i mentioned earlier but i feel like i didn't have any training. i have my own experience. >> before you continue, just saying you do not need experience to come into the youth commission position which i feel sometimes is the- >>b i have no experience in politics. >> push people not to want to apply for the job because i don't know anything about local government and won't know how do this or that but you don't need it. >> you don't get thrown on a commission. there are people to support and educate you. >> i do feel in some ways i'm expected to know a concern thing or behave the

way like the political machine kind of wants me to and you know, be professional and smile when the presenter is obviously like lying to me and stuff and thank them for coming and like, that's just not me. don't feel you will disrespect me and lie to me and then expect me to be nice because i am supposed to be nice to you. i feel people feel they can get away and that i'm not go toog call them out or not supposed to call them out as a young person. i'm supposed to thank you so much for your time. thanks for valuing my poor youth commission. no, i don't know-i just feel you wouldn't lie to the board of supervisors like that or if you did you would get called out so i'll call you out. there is this expectation we are supposed to behave like-not saying we shouldn't be professional, we should be professional but i

expect the same professionalism back. i don't want to be, yes. >> there have been times people come to the youth commission and are think they forget we are ultimately here to hold the city government accountable. >> an employee of the city. >> that and also it is like, the job of the youths commission is to be a voice for youth. we are going to call you out when you don't know if lie is the words to use, fudge the number, whatever happens. there have been times where i'm like, you forgot this isn't just a group of young people who are interested in this, but a commission who job is to hold people accountable. >> i think the image of youth in the city is also just really interesting because some people will be like, you dont do any knowledge, they hang out and get (inaudible) they just sit and play video games. a lot of people come into youth commission presentations thinking we don't know anything. we will

surprise them when we know these procedures and ask the specific questions related to policies on whatever they are presenting on. it is funny. >> so, is it i guess not youth commission but in general as youth is it a challenge to get more youth interested in politics and anything the youth commission is try toog do to help that? >> i think just bringing more awareness of what the youth commission is and the resources available for people to sign up and join. that is something that our community outreach members are trying to do. >> yeah. last year i was (inaudible) and we did this thing where we made instagram posts about the initiatives we worked on. we detailed the initiatives and free (inaudible) able to put the work on social media and legislation on social media is important because it teaches youth that you can have a voice in all these city

policies that are effecting your lives and a voice in the big movements and think making the youth commission as accessible to avenue everyone as possible is important. >> (inaudible) >> vote 16 is an initiative by the civic engagement committee of the youth commission and works to lower the voting age to 16 age in all city elections- >> san francisco specifically. >> san francisco city elections. it is actually received a lot of support from the board of supervisors, but lost my nearly 3 percent in the first election in 2016- >>.5 >>.5 in the next election. we are working to get it on the 2024 ballot again with more voter education, more outreach because we believe it is important youth get involved in voting early because it instills a habit that voting is important. >> i think-i touched on this before, but a lot of young people are interested

in politics but also scared to get involved because of how toxic it can be. i feel like i also heard from so many young people their first interaction with politics was negative so they were steered away from it. i had plenty situations happen to me with political activism but i think the environment we have on the youth commission and trying to create more generally within youth advocacy and activism in san francisco is positive and supportive. all of us have different opinions, have different views on issues, and voted different ways but i also know i can go to any of the people around the table and on the youth commission to say this was a bad experience that i felt x, y, z about or i am in the situation, can we talk about it, because we all are in the same boat of sometimes things don't go our way and because we are young

people we have certain experiences we want to share with each other as well. >> i think what is interesting about the youth commission is you don't need to know much about politics to be on the youth commission. my perception of it was that i need to know all of these u.s. amendments and need (inaudible) i think that is what a lot of people think the youth commission is. that you need abundance of political knowledge to be on the youth commission but i realized it was less political. a lot of community coalitions and just speaking from your own perspective and where you come from as a youth for better outcomes for everyone in san francisco and i think that is important because it is like, i think the discussions in the youth commission encourage people to talk about where they come from and what they truly believe rather then affiliation to a political party. that is not what the youth commission is at all. >> i remember when i was applying to the youth commission, i reached out to (inaudible) i don't know

anything about politics and scared. what will happen during the first meeting and you were like no, you will be fine and learn along the way and that is for any youth who want to get involved you dont need to go anything. you will be trained and taught along the way so take initiative, join it, don't be scared. >> also people get turned down from the youth commission. the supervisor jz mayor decides. there are other opportunities to get involved. reach out to youth commission staff. the youth commission seats people on other bodies and outside the youth commission as a whole another area of politics and policy work as well. i also say anyone watching this being i don't know if i want to be on the youth commission or i want applied but didn't get on, there is still so many ways to get involved. we have a website you can find our information on. i really encourage that because you don't get started until you get started and once you get started you keep going and end up in a seat like this. >> i think it is so funny because involvement in politics

is a little ball rolling. there is a million little balls rolling and opportunities. it is just crazy actually because the first thing i did is internship where i cleaned the streets in san francisco and now i'm like on the youth commission. >> (inaudible) if you are not sherbet the youth commission or not accepted to first time volunteer for the district supervisors, try to form a relationship with them or who ever is in the office and apply again to the youth commission. >> i think the other thing too is like, as much as there are people involved, there are a lot of people who aren't and it is a great opportunity because i feel the biggest thing-you don't have to know anything special. you don't need to have learned anything. just show up and live your experience. you don't need to be on the city commission. we have our meetings are open to the public. you can show up to

the board of supervisors and make public comment and speak your truth. just know your own experience and it will get you pretty far honesty. people will recognize you. i was just some little kid who would go to the mta board of directors and are- >> now they know you. >> i was at a random event and they came up to me and hugged me and are like my gosh, you are hayden miller from the meeting. i felt somebody. i'm like wow, these people know me and they don't always vote the way i want them to vote, but they listen and they hear you and that's what government is there for. just remember at the end of the day, it might not always go the your way, the way government works, but for you that is the whole purpose of government is to serve you, so- >> the youth commission has public comment on every item and every motion we ever make. every city commission does. our meetings are open to the

public. we want to make space for you. we want to hear from you. please come, share your opinion and you can also even if you can't make a meeting you can write public comment in too. i say especially at the-it is hyper-local the youth commission. we only represent young people in one specific area and one specific state so that is where your public comment will have the most im pact. a couple times people reached out and said this is a issue i didn't know needed to be addressed but it was because i reached out that this is something relatively easy we could address and change too. it isn't a big deal for city government but it is big deal for this person. >> adding to hayden's point, i think city hall is pretty youth friendly because ewen was talking about running into city hall at 5 p.m. i have multiple occasions where i run down trying to get to the bathroom in city hall and an elected official would pass by

or i'm holding a big bag of snacks. i think professionalism is important but like hayden was saying it is important to speak your truth and be yourself because coming into city hall, i didn't know anything about city politics. all i knew is i cared about these organizations, i cared about all these issues and i wanted to make a difference and people here really believed in me regardless how prfessional or elquent i was. they mentored me and come a long way. it is important a place like this is accessible for youth because people have offered me professional clothe to go to this event and they offered me opportunities to like speak on panels and have speeches in front of crowds of 200 people and i'm shocked people believe in my. that is what san francisco city government is and it is beautiful. >> everyone in the building is still like a person. i remember the first time i met with an elected

official and was like i'm nervous and what if i say something wrong and they came in and was like i'm tired from the last meeting. give me a second while i get a cup of coffee. there are moments where i'm like, it really like-we ultimately are still just students who spend most of our day in high school. elected officials are still people who make mistakes and who are doing their best and who have been entrusted with this position by voters, but also are still people who you can relate and talk to. >> i think before i would see city government as like blocks. they were machines but it is people operating these machines. people are making decisions and writing these documents and i think realizing that was so important understanding how i make a voice. i think a lot of the role on the commission isn't research, it isn't writing, it is just connecting with people. understanding that

city government is all just people and making realizing how important the connections are. it really helps you in your work. >> really realwy appreciate you all coming today. i learned a lot from you all. please please always keep saying your truth, your voice and also encouraging other youth to share their voice as well and i think-we always think we are in good hands but we got to keep fighting the good fight so matter what so thank you for joining us today. >> (inaudible) follow sfyouth-calm. >> we have facebook too. >> we meelt every other monday 5 to 7. >> thank you to sfgovtv as well. >> thank you so much. >> awesome. thank you. >> thank you.

>> we do in a way which is exciting engaging-the idea is bring the stories to life, because they are so relevant to the questions we all are asking today about where we belong, who are we, who do wree want to be. we wanted to be do something about food, because it is such a wonderful entrance. to get people to think what are these cultures, how did they come about and how do i relate to them. we can't live the idea [indiscernible] >> there is hundreds if not

thousands of immigrants kitchens and we wanted to show how immigration from 1849 through now the different dishes bought here and how it shaped the culture of the city. . not the thing we have to sit down and read for hours and hours, but you get a 2 and a half minute story and the feeling you can eat those foods and never get a dish the same way again. you have the context. >> we decided to set an journey across the city. the result is [indiscernible] >> san francisco is a place where there are so many different immigrants communities. we are a sanctuary city, a welcoming place to be and the melting spot is a

great to get out and explore the city, the history and how we got to have some of the best cuisine in the country and maybe even the entire world. >> my mother and myself and two sisters--we had to leave quick. my mom had one hour to pack and gather her things and gather her kids and head to the airport and evacuate. we found ourself in san francisco. my grand mother was already here. that is why san francisco was the destination for us. it goes back to my grand mother and who loved to travel and she was also very afraid of the war going on in vietnam. she came to san francisco and she kind of fell in love with the sitdy. city. she visited the italian deli by

oakland beach because she loved the beach and met the owner and the owner told her that this place is for sale and she decided this is her opportunity to stay in san francisco and her dream to be a business owner and open a restaurant. >> i was born [indiscernible] i graduated from a french program culinary school, then i [indiscernible] at that time, we had college of san mateo in the back yard and had a program for foreign students and we got together and went to the american embassy and this woman welcomed us and she gave both. it is not

[indiscernible] and then after that i got accepted and [indiscernible] ended up in san francisco where i had friends so i came to college of san mateo. from there, i transferred to chico state college, so i graduated there and that is when my culinary adventure started. i love cooking and also remind me of my childhood mptd >> my father had a dream and grit and determination. worked very very hard. to me, food is one of the most readily accessible to understanding a culture. i don't think many people have the opportunity to travel to armenia or lebanon. we are lucky in the city, the abundance of asian cuisines and [indiscernible] restaurants are in many ways an

opportunity to engage with another culture through food. >> my grand father had his backyard you name it, we had it. [indiscernible] but my grandma's cookie the memories of the [indiscernible] very powerful. when you channel these memories there is a image because it is a experience all 5 senses get if to it. i think that is why city is so important for immigrants. the first thing you [indiscernible] we got to eat. you got to nourish the body and you remember and i went from memory really. >> i remember my grand mother

telling me stories that when she first opened in 1971, people really didn't know much about vietnamese food and she started selling the italian deli food and half the food and half vietnamese food and she stands in the corner trying to pass samples just to lur customers into the restaurant and try vietnamese food. i think when you enter a new place and you have your family and you have each other and food is what holds your family together. at least for my family for sure, that is the time we get to enjoy food, make connections, bond, sit together and be together. i just remember my grand mother and mom working hard all the time and once a week we would have family dinners. we gather and she would cook

the food. all the kids we always look forward to that. my grand mother coming in 1971, she brought vietnamese food in san francisco. we are one of the first vietnamese arrest raunt restaurant in san francisco. >> for san francisco to have this map and look at all the people who came here and made things you can only find in sf. we are the place to get a mission burete. burrito. that could be overlooked and not seen [indiscernible] >> important because it highlights the san francisco, the diversity

for each restaurant and each spot on the map to share their story through food they serve to diners. i think it is special way to highlight the welcomeness and the [indiscernible] san francisco community is bay area has. >> it is one of the project that is so uniquely san francisco that speaks to the long history of immigration and cuisine the city has been known for. the melting spot allows the small businesses that have been around for a while to really shine with their own unique stories and flavors and so we really love it. the ecosystem in san francisco is very unique and very welcoming of immigrants and immigrant initiatives. san francisco choice to honor us with the legacy business recognition really shows their support of small

local businesses. >> a legacy business is a business that has been around and open in san francisco for at least 30 years. legacy businesses are the most foundational businesses in our neighborhood corridors. they provided services and a place for community to gather for often times for generations. they are really part of the culturally fabric that makes san francisco neighborhoods so unique. >> the idea is take what i think is [indiscernible] about immigration, about belonging, about some of the amazing history of the city. [indiscernible]

>> in august 2019 construction began on the new facility at 1995 evans avenue in bayview. it will house motorcycle police and department of forensic services division. both sfpd groups are in two buildings that need to be vacated. they will join the new $183 million facility in late 2021. >> elements of the cfi and the traffic company are housed at the hall of justice, which has been determined to be seismically unfit. it is slated for demolition. in addition to that the forensic services crime lab is also slated for demolition. it was time and made sense to put these elements currently

spread in different parts of the city together into a new facility. >> the project is located in the bayview area, in the area near estes creek. when san francisco was first formed and the streetcars were built back it was part of the bay. we had to move the building as close to the edge as possible on bedrock and solid elements piles down to make sure it was secure. >> it will be approximately 100,000 square feet, that includes 8,000 square feet for traffic company parking garage. >> the reason we needed too new building, this is inadequate for the current staffing needs and also our motor department. the officers need more room, secured parking. so the csi unit location is at the hall of justice, and the crime laboratory is located at building 60 sixty old hunters

point shipyard. >> not co-located doesn't allow for easy exchange of information to occur. >> traffic division was started in 1909. they were motor officers. they used sidecars. officers who road by themselves without the sidecar were called solo. that is a common term for the motorcycle officers. we have 45 officers assigned to the motorcycles. all parking at the new facility will be in one location. the current locker room with shared with other officers. it is not assigned to just traffic companies. there are two showers downstairs and up. both are gym and shop weres are old. it needs constant maintenance. >> forensic services provides

five major types of testing. we develop fingerprints on substances and comparisons. there are firearms identification to deal with projectiles, bullets or cartridge casings from shootings. dna is looking at a whole an rare of evidence from -- array of evidence from dna to sexual assault to homicide. we are also in the business of doing breath allyzer analysis for dui cases. we are resurrecting the gunshot residue testing to look for the presence of gunshot residue. lifespan is 50 years. >> it has been raised up high

enough that if the bay starts to rise that building will operate. the facility is versus sustainable. if the lead gold highest. the lighting is led. gives them good lights and reduces energy use way down. water throughout the project we have low water use facilities. gardens outside, same thing, low water use for that. other things we have are green roofs on the project. we have studies to make sure we have maximum daylight to bring it into the building. >> the new facility will not be open to the public. there will be a lobby. there will be a deconstruction motorcycle and have parts around. >> the dna labs will have a vestibule before you go to the space you are making sure the air is clean, people are coming in and you are not contaminating anything in the labs.

>> test firing in the building you are generating lead and chemicals. we want to quickly remove that from the individuals who are working in that environment and ensure what we put in the air is not toxic. there are scrubbers in the air to ensure any air coming out is also at the cleanest standards. >> you will see that kind of at the site. it has three buildings on the site. one is for the motorcycle parking, main building and back behind is a smaller building for evidence vehicles. there is a crime, crime scene. they are put into the secure facility that locks the cars down while they are examined. >> they could be vehicles involved in the shooting. there might be projectiles lodged in the vehicle, cartridge casings inside the vehicle, it could be a vehicle where a

aggravated sexual occurred and there might be biological evidence, fingerprints, recovered merchandise from a potential robbery or other things. >> the greatest challenge on the project is meeting the scope requirements of the project given the superheated construction market we have been facing. i am proud to say we are delivering a project where we are on budget. >> the front plaza on the corner will be inviting to the public. something that gives back to the public. the building sits off the edge. it helps it be protected. >> what we are looking for is an updated building, with facilities to meet our unit's needs. >> working with the san francisco police department is an honor and privilege. i am looking forward to seeing

their faces as the police officers move to the new facility. >> it is a welcome change, a new surrounding that is free from all of the challenges that we face with being remote, and then the ability to offer new expanded services to the city and police department investigations unit. i can't wait until fall of 2021 when the building is finally ready to go and be occupied and the people can get into the facility to serve them and serve the community. dev mission's goal is

aiming to train young adults, youth so we can be a wealth and disparity in underserved communities like where we are today. my name is leo sosa. i'm the founder and executive director for devmission. we're sitting inside a computer lab where residents come and get support when they give help about how to set up an e-mail account. how to order prescriptions online. create a résumé. we are also now paying attention to provide tech support. we have collaborated with the san francisco mayor's office and the department of technology to implement a broad band network for the residents

here so they can have free internet access. we have partnered with community technology networks to provide computer classes to the seniors and the residents. so this computer lab becomes a hub for the community to learn how to use technology, but that's the parents and the adults. we have been able to identify what we call a stem date. the acronym is science technology engineering and math. kids should be exposed no matter what type of background or ethnicity or income status. that's where we actually create magic. >> something that the kids are really excited about is science and so the way that we execute that is through making slime. and as fun as it is, it's still a chemical reaction and you start to understand that with the materials that you need to make the slime. >> they love adding their

little twists to everything. it's just a place for them to experiment and that's really what we want. >> i see. >> really what the excitement behind that is that you're making something. >> logs, legos, sumo box, art, drawing, computers, mine craft, and really it's just awaking opportunity. >> keeping their attention is like one of the biggest challenges that we do have because, you know, they're kids. they always want to be doing something, be helping with something. so we just let them be themselves. we have our set of rules in place that we have that we want them to follow and live up to. and we also have our set of expectations that we want them to achieve. this is like my first year officially working with kids. and definitely i've had moments where they're not getting something. they don't really understand it and you're trying to just talk to them in a way that they can make it work teaching them in

different ways how they can get the light bulb to go off and i've seen it first-hand and it makes me so happy when it does go off because it's like, wow, i helped them understand this concept. >> i love playing games and i love having fun with my friends playing dodge ball and a lot of things that i like. it's really cool. >> they don't give you a lot of cheese to put on there, do they? you've got like a little bit left. >> we learn programming to make them work. we do computers and programming. at the bottom here, we talk to

them and we press these buttons to make it go. and this is to turn it off. and this is to make it control on its own. if you press this twice, it can do any type of tricks. like you can move it like this and it moves. it actually can go like this. >> like, wow, they're just absorbing everything. so it definitely is a wholehearted moment that i love experiencing. >> the realities right now, 5.3 latinos working in tech and about 6.7 african americans working in tech. and, of course, those tech companies are funders. so i continue to work really hard with them to close that gap and work with the san francisco unified school district so juniors and seniors

come to our program, so kids come to our stem hub and be exposed to all those things. it's a big challenge. >> we have a couple of other providers here on site, but we've all just been trying to work together and let the kids move around from each department. some kids are comfortable with their admission, but if they want to jump in with city of dreams or hunter's point, we just try to collaborate to provide the best opportunity in the community. >> devmission has provided services on westbrook. they teach you how to code. how to build their own mini robot to providing access for the youth to partnerships with adobe and sony and google and twitter. and so devmission has definitely brought access for our families to resources that our residents may or may not

have been able to access in the past. >> the san francisco house and development corporation gave us the grant to implement this program. it hasn't been easy, but we have been able to see now some of the success stories of some of those kids that have been able to take the opportunity and continue to grow within their education and eventually become a very successful citizen. >> so the computer lab, they're doing the backpacks. i don't know if you're going to be able to do the class. you still want to try? . yeah. go for it. >> we have a young man by the name of ivan mello. he came here two and a half years ago to be part of our digital arts music lab. graduating with natural, fruity loops, rhymes. all of our music lyrics are clean. he came as an intern, and now

he's running the program. that just tells you, we are only creating opportunities and there's a young man by the name of eduardo ramirez. he tells the barber, what's that flyer? and he says it's a program that teaches you computers and art. and i still remember the day he walked in there with a baseball cap, full of tattoos. nice clean hair cut. i want to learn how to use computers. graduated from the program and he wanted to work in i.t.. well, eduardo is a dreamer. right. so trying to find him a job in the tech industry was very challenging, but that didn't stop him. through the effort of the office of economic work force and the grant i reached out to a few folks i know.

post mates decided to bring him on board regardless of his legal status. he ended his internship at post mates and now is at hudacity. that is the power of what technology does for young people that want to become part of the tech industry. what we've been doing, it's very innovative. helping kids k-12, transitional age youth, families, parents, communities, understand and to be exposed to stem subjects. imagine if that mission one day can be in every affordable housing community. the opportunities that we would create and that's what i'm trying to do with this.

>> good morning. my name is david chu. i'm the city attorney of san francisco and i want to thank all of you for being here today. we are here to announce a first of its kind lawsuit against the largest manufacturers of ultra processed foods ultra processed foods that are making us sick. plain and simple these products in our diets are deeply linked to serious health conditions imposing enormous costs on millions of americans and cities and states across our country. our case is about companies who designed food to be harmful and addictive and marketed their products to maximize profits. like the tobacco industry, they knew their products make people very sick. but hid the truth from the public profited from untold billions and left americans to deal with the consequences.

>> over the years our san francisco city attorney's office has successfully held accountable industries that profited enormously from products that they knew harmed the health of millions. tobacco lead paint opioids. this is our next fight. so what are ultra processed foods? we're talking about food that is not food that is not found in nature created by combining artificial chemicals with industrialized processes. >> you can see a few of the worst offenders right here. >> while ultra processed foods often have high sodium added sugar saturated fats, the health concerns are not just the amount of calories fat or salt. ultra processed foods themselves cause unique health risks because of their chemicals, because of how those chemicals are combined the processes by which they're made. the industry has created thousands of new chemicals

which the body metabolizes and craves differently. and they are designed to be addictive. addiction this is a feature not a bug. i want to just share a quick personal story. when i was a kid my mom used pringles to get me to take swim lessons. and to this day i love my pringles. >> but their designed to be highly addictive. >> in recent decades this industry has flooded the american food supply. >> today they make up 70% of our food supply. there's no one who can completely avoid ultra processed foods. >> so what's the harm? ultra processed foods have created an enormous public health crisis with skyrocketing health care costs. as the consumption of these products has risen, so is chronic disease. many recent studies and massive data sets have confirmed the very clear link between ultra processed foods and chronic

diseases. type two diabetes. fatty liver disease. heart disease. kidney disease. colorectal cancer. cancer. crohn's disease. depression. and the impact on children has been particularly alarming. unprecedented levels of obesity and type two diabetes. we have reached a tipping point in the scientific research about the harm of these products. significant studies have been coming out confirming what we know. just this month lancet published three papers last month the journal of the american medical association wrote about it and so on. international consensus by the scientific community despite industry attempts over many years to deny, deceive and literally pay off scientists. now how did this happen? the tobacco industry drove the rise of ultra processed foods

starting in the 1960s big tobacco bought food. but let me say that again starting in the 1960s big tobacco bought major food companies. r.j. reynolds purchased nabisco and del monte. philip morris purchased general foods and kraft in the 1970s the food industry consolidated these companies then transferred people ideas, technology from big tobacco to the food industry. they use big tobacco tactics to research design and sell addictive products. they used addiction science and marketing techniques that followed the big tobacco playbook of creating the illusion and erosion of consumer choice. on the marketing front they bombarded kids with product messages and advertising with cartoon mascots from tony the tiger and fred flintstone to pop petrol. they use integrated marketing strategies with toy manufacturers and child focused media companies from disney

and nickelodeon to mattel, nintendo and marvel. and they specifically targeted low income communities of color and their kids. >> and i'll just note that this is not just about what we think of as junk food. many ultra processed foods don't seem unhealthy but they're falsely marketed as healthy. the most damning aspect of all this is like the tobacco and opioid industries the ultra prude, the ultra processed food industry had actual knowledge that their products caused harm . in 1999, as is laid out in our complaint, the ceos of the largest u.s. food companies met pillsbury. kraft executives warned industry leaders that these ultra processed foods had gone too far. they predicted devastating public health consequences health conditions that would cost our country $100 billion a year a public health toll that would rival tobacco. those warnings were ignored.

just last week before thanksgiving, the public learned that a campbell's soup executive was caught on a recording in an hours long rant describing their products as highly processed food for poor people. i suggest you listen to it. these companies know their products are harming people but they continue to design market and profit off them particularly at the expense of our kids. so our lawsuit the companies we assume today include kraft heinz, mondelez, post holdings, coca-cola, pepsi, general mills, nestle usa, kellogg, mars inc. and conagra brands. we are seeking to hold these companies accountable for their unfair and deceptive practices for violating california's unfair competition law and public nuisance laws. >> we're seeking to enjoin deceptive marketing and to obtain restitution and civil

penalties to recover the enormous costs borne by governments public health costs that stem from chronic diseases due to ultra processed foods. our reliance on ultra processed foods is decades in the making. while we are not going to be able to reverse that overnight this lawsuit should be the beginning of how we ensure accountability. >> we have a number of speakers today and again i'm just very appreciative of all the folks that have come together on this topic. i'd like to introduce from the san francisco board of supervisors supervisor shimon walton who has been a leader in our public health space. he has led bold policies to stop large industries from preying on our communities, particularly communities of color with their harmful products. supervisor. thank you. city attorney two and again good morning to everyone and thank you so much to our medical professionals who are here. i want to appreciate city attorney chiu and his office for bringing suit.

as you know, we have to do everything we can to one, protect our communities and fight the deception of big corporations who intend to harm particularly on our most vulnerable communities. and we know that our communities have live with the consequences of ultra processed foods as well as other attacks for too long. these products have shaped diets in ways that fuel chronic disease and place the heaviest burden on working families, low income neighborhoods and communities of color. when an industry prioritizes profit over public health, government has a responsibility to step in demand transparency and to protect its residents from harm. >> if we want a food system that puts people first, we have to start with our own house city departments serve food every single day in shelters, jails, youth programs, long term care and community based

services. that means thousands of san franciscans rely on us for meals that should promote health and dignity, not contribute to the very conditions that we are trying to eliminate. today we will introduce a resolution at the board of supervisors meeting that is about understanding where ultra processed foods show up in our system so we can lead with integrity. san francisco cannot call for accountability from corporations while ignoring the impacts of the foods that we distribute. addressing this harm at its source begins with city government modeling the standards we want to see across the country. this is how we advance health equity, protect families and ensure san francisco is leading by example. again, i want to thank our city attorney david chiu for his leadership and for taking bold action to hold this industry

accountable. his work in this fight makes it clear that san francisco will not sit by while corporations profit from products that harm our residents. this effort creates the foundation for stronger public health protections statewide and it reinforces why it is so important for the city to examine our own practices. i look forward to working with the city attorney as we move forward in this fight to protect our communities. and again, i want to thank you all for being here today. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor walton for your partnership in this work. san francisco has led when it comes to moving forward on public health issues and i want to bring up as our next speaker our city's director of public health dan sy who previously led our nation's medicaid program at the centers for medicare and medicaid services in washington. and he is super familiar with

the costs of the health impacts caused by ultra processed foods to local, state and federal government. thank you. good morning. i want to thank the city attorney for raising this issue and bring suit supervisor and others here. the reason why this is so important to us at the department of public health here in san francisco is because our core mission and vision is to make sure that san francisco is the healthiest place on earth not just for some people but for all people. and what the data show us are that the leading causes of mortality in the city are heart disease even more than overdose in some cases heart disease, diabetes and other related chronic diseases. the impact the mortality of those diseases are also disproportionately felt within

communities of color. the average life expectancy in san francisco today is 82 years. the average life expectancy for black and black african-americans in the city is 66 years. that is unacceptable. when you look at the drivers of what leads to that delta, that difference in mortality in lost years and you look at the causes of mortality, heart disease, diabetes related conditions are clearly related to that. i do not believe it is possible to make san francisco the healthiest place on earth for all people without also looking at and addressing food because food is health. and you will hear from our subject matter experts in the city and clinicians and researchers and all across the country the very compelling linkage between ultra processed food and the addictive nature of that and the downstream health outcomes and mortality and other things that i've just noted and communities of color

low income communities have been disproportionately impacted in on this. i also want to note some of the financial costs and other health outcomes that we as a system face by 2031 health care spending is expected to reach $7 trillion. much of that burden is borne by states, cities and the public health care system in the united states between medical obligations, employee health benefit obligations, public health initiatives, the state of california and san francisco are spending billions of dollars a year on health care. in 2024 medi-cal accounted for approximately 124 billion in expenditures 3.9 3.95 billion of that expenditure is attributable to san francisco. and diabetes was one of the leading causes of death and hospitalization in san francisco between 2017 and 2021. as we've rolled that data

forward that continues to play out as is heart disease and diabetes is a major contributor to a whole range of heart disease hospitalizations from diabetes, hypertension and heart disease were substantially higher for communities of color than across and low income communities. then across all of san francisco. all that paints a very compelling picture for san francisco to be the healthiest place on earth for all people. for us to think about the public health burden and human impact and financial impact on the public health system, we have to look at food which is a core part of health which is why i and we at the department are very grateful for the city attorney and everybody here for really taking this on. >> thank you very much. >> thank you director ci for your leadership. so our san francisco city attorney's office we are joined in this lawsuit by three outstanding private law firms andrus anderson two cello

levitt and morgan and morgan all of which have extensive of experience fighting industries that harm public health. i'd like to invite two of those attorneys to speak today. food abuse from decarlo levitt and rene roca from morgan and morgan. thank you. city attorney. good afternoon, everyone. let's move over. i want to rene it is truly our honor to stand with the city attorney and the attorneys of san francisco. yvonne mayer, sara eisenberg, ronald lee and jesse lanier. it takes a great deal of courage to make a decision to move forward and to tackle such a crisis for the city of san francisco and to set an example for people across the country. this case is as personal as it gets. philip morris and rj reynolds the biggest of the big tobacco companies who unleash tobacco addiction and cancer on our

communities decided to use that same technology all their money, all their cunning to use that same science to create a whole new type of quasi food which is what this is upf or ultra processed foods without your knowledge and secretly tobacco has hijacked our food system for decades. during this time they have used psychological and marketing techniques techniques that they developed for marketing and selling cigarets to make and sell ups to the citizens of san francisco with a specific eye to selling ups to children big tobacco now acting as big food did all of this with the sole focus of making ups a staple of the american diet despite their own absolute knowledge of the real health and societal damages that ups cause they're sole focus to

make money. but they did that by knowingly placing the health of the people of san francisco and the health of americans at severe risk. we've all gone to the supermarket believing that we are buying food in the manner that we've understood food to be for thousands of years. but actually we've been unknowingly purchasing ups. we reasonably relied on gross misrepresentation and lies by the defendants that these that ups were food and that they were convenient and in many cases that they were healthy. but now we know that not only were those representations untrue but that these commonplace products gummy fruit snacks, pop tarts, hot pockets, ready made meals and liquid cheese products actually change the way our children's bodies process food

and that these physiological changes were by design and with devastating effects to the people and the children of san francisco. as you will hear shortly my co counsel rene roche will provide additional context as it relates to ups but we are very grateful to stand with the city attorney and the people of san francisco in taking a historic stand in a historical case that will change the future of our children and grandchildren. thank you. thank you. even though they're everywhere now, upf have not been around for very long. they're new and alien to our bodies and the science is undeniable. >> ultra processed food causes type two diabetes in kids. that disease never existed in children prior to the invention of ultra processed foods. >> ultra processed foods are driving the obesity crisis in san francisco, california

and the united states and they're driving cardiovascular diseases and early death. as we allege in our complaint, the defendants here including food companies that were owned by the tobacco companies like kraft heinz mondelez post holdings knowingly created dangerous and addictive products. we also allege that they have persistently hidden the truth and lied about the effect of these products. they have caused a public nuisance and a public health crisis in san francisco and beyond. and today the city of san francisco and the sovereign people of california stand up and say enough. it's time for accountability and justice and time to create a brighter future for our children one with food that nurtures instead of harms. today marks a major milestone in the history of public health and we are confident that san

francisco and the people of california can help guide us into a new and better era. we appreciate their courage and are honored to be working on their behalf. thank you. >> thank you. our final speaker today comes from the medical establishment san francisco. we follow the facts. we follow the science and we certainly listen to our doctors. we have a number of pillars from our medical community here and i want to thank dr. sarita sympathy who is an internist, dr. john ma who's a surgeon. and i'd like to bring up dr. kim greuel green who is an associate clinical professor at ucsf to discuss the harms of these products that she has seen throughout her career as a physician. good morning and thank you so much, attorney general. city attorney general. my name is kim dr. kim noel green. i'm the past president of the san francisco marin medical

society and a trustee of the california medical association. but i'm speaking here today as a pediatrician and a mom where i am terrified about what ultra processed foods are doing and have done to our kids and families. i see every day how they are impacting our kids, my patients and all of our families. richard research has shown that these foods now make up nearly 70% of the calories in children's diets in the united states. that means that most of what our kids eat does not resemble nutrient rich foods like fruits, vegetables and lean proteins which are essential for growth and brain development. adults consume more than 50% of their calories in these ups. mounting research as you've heard increasingly links these ultra processed foods to severe diseases. we've heard about obesity type type two diabetes and cardiovascular disease and even mental health and cognitive function are impacted in conditions like

depression and adhd. i have seen the unrelenting rise of these conditions in younger and younger children in my practice. i fight this every day in my household and i am losing because these foods are so exciting and addictive to our kids. and this is not just a matter of me asking my kids and patients to make healthier personal choices. aggressive marketing, low cost and easy availability make ultra processed foods the default option for many families especially those in underserved and underrepresented communities. >> the content quinces are profound. higher rates of chronic diseases poorer academic performance and long term health costs for our city, our state and our country. we must act and i'm so grateful to be here standing aside this group. like the successes of litigation against big tobacco and big soda, today's lawsuit

is an important step towards holding food companies accountable for profiting for products that put our health at risk. let's stop these companies from poisoning our children and our family. thank you. >> thank you, doctor. as we conclude and happy to open up for questions, i want to just take a moment and thank the incredible professionals in my office for their work. that includes jesse lanier, ron lee, sara eisenberg, yvonne murray and others. and i just noticed i've forgotten that that someone had left my favorite can of pringles underneath this just on a random shelf. but as i mentioned before when i was growing up my mother used to bribe me with pringles to get me into the pool to take the swim lessons. i still crave them to this day. but just in recent months i have learned about the specific harms of just this product alone that has been written about. so with that anyone want some you can take them off my hands.

>> we're happy to answer any questions or. >> okay, go ahead. james, do you think you've learned about the dangers of processed foods? so for a long time why you why are you bringing this lawsuit now? >> so a couple of reasons. first and foremost, the science has really tipped here. there have been studies for many, many years but all the massive data sets, all of the studies around the world show the link between ultra processed foods and all of the horrific public health impacts that we've been talking about the cancers, the diseases it's almost every month that we are hearing from another reputable medical journal about this link. there are now many, many of these studies. >> the data is is irrefutable. >> cbs news, the bpa, the consumer brands association

says there's quote no scientific definition of ultra processed foods and these compmpiessre making efforts to make their products healthier and safer by adding protein and fiber. >> what's your response to that? so we've heard that from the industry the industry likes to quibble on whether there's a definition or not. there's a very clear understanding of what ultra processed foods are about. we're going to get into that in this lawsuit. but what we know is that there is an entire category foods that represent 70% of the american food supply that is making the public sick and that is what this is about. there are definitions that are out there that we will discuss in the lawsuit. it's referenced in our complaint but we look forward to having that discussion in court. so the consumer brands association is saying that these companies are keeping grocery prices down on consumers. is there a way to provide healthy food at an affordable price for families? >> first of all, absolutely there are plenty of examples of

affordable foods that are not ultra processed but i would say that diabetes is unaffordable, heart disease is unaffordable, obesity is unaffordable. these industries are peddling products that have caused americans to be addicted and are leading to long term costs that are absolutely unaffordable for all of us and are unaffordable for city and state governments around the country. if anyone else wants to add anything to that question are you seeking to change marketing practices? are you seeking to remove certain ingredients? are you seeking to limit sales ? >> so there's nothing about the lawsuit that would ban any products but it is our perspective that this is an industry that is engaged in highly deceptive advertising. so we're certainly looking to address advertising and we certainly want to ensure accountability on the part of industries that has created enormous costs on society, on

public health systems, on human beings. so we'll be looking to get accountability for those costs . anyone else? >> does that look like compensation? absolutely. we will be seeking monetary compensation. >> any final questions? if not, we have a bunch of folks here who are happy to do interviews and with that again ,i just want to appreciate everyone standing with us and others who have worked with us on the filing of this lawsuit. the story will continue. thank you very much. >> thank you so much

situated. >> i call to order the meeting of the sanitation and streets commission. today is monday october 20th, 2025 secretary fuller please call the roll. good morning. please respond with hear or present as only a user here. >> commissioner yourself is present.